I'd like to invite you to look with me in Hebrews chapter 8. And my text is from verse 7 down to verse 13. There's a lot more here than what we can consider in one time together. So I'm just going to introduce this, uh, in this message and we'll just see how far we get. I want to speak with you about God's covenants, God's covenants. That's what's described here in verse seven, where we read for if that first covenant had been faultless, Then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, because they continued not in my covenant. "'and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. "'For this is the covenant that I will make "'with the house of Israel "'after those days, saith the Lord. "'I will put my laws into their mind "'and write them in or upon their hearts. "'And I will be to them a God, "'and they shall be to me a people. "'And they shall not teach every man his neighbor "'and every man his brother, saying, "'Know the Lord, for it shall For all shall know me from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. And that he saith a new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. There are a number of different so-called theological systems by which men approach the scriptures. I would like to stand here tonight and tell you that I'm not part of any system, but that would be a lie. Simply because any way that we approach scripture, we do it in from a perspective, a different perspective. I always pray that it be with eyes of the spirit to truly read and understand what is in the scriptures. But as we all know, our minds are depraved and we need to be taught regularly. But the reason why I mentioned these different systems is depending on who you talk to and how people have been raised and taught, they tend to approach the scriptures from those perspectives. And the first is what is commonly called covenant theology. And the reason being, as you read down through here, even our particular reading, you'll see how many times the word covenant is mentioned. And so there are those who approach scripture from this perspective. They see three particular covenants. When you go back and read some of the reformers, and the Puritans, this was their mindset. They had what was called the Covenant of Redemption, which is explained as being that eternal agreement between God the Father and God the Son. And that agreement was to redeem and elect people from guilt and power of sin. and that God from eternity appointed Christ to live a life of perfect obedience to the law and to die that penal, substitutionary, sacrificial death as the covenant representative for his people. I don't have any problem with that. I believe that there's clearly throughout scripture that everlasting purpose of God whereby he named those that Christ would say. But the problem comes when people begin to say that because it was purpose from eternity, then it was done. And that God then has always seen his elect as forgiven and justified. Now they'll add through the blood of Christ, but in dealing with Abraham, David, and these others, they believe that Abraham was already justified from eternity. And there is where I believe the difference comes because when I read the scriptures, yes, there is that eternal covenant of redemption, the everlasting covenant, but it was based upon a blood sacrifice. It had to be ratified. in time. It had to be, and that's what God looked to. All of history, the history of redemption, looked to his coming, doing, and dying, that God might be just to justify. And so in this covenant theology, while the foundation is true, interpretations as to what it means is where you'll find people varying. The second covenant they call in this system the covenant of works. And again, I don't have any problem with that. It just simply means that when God made that covenant with Adam to represent all mankind as our federal head, Adam fell and we fell on him. It was a conditional covenant, covenant of works. It promised life for obedience, but death for disobedience. And we know from Romans chapter five, verses 12 to 21, that by one man sin entered the world. And so when we read here in Hebrews eight, about that first covenant, had it been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. It just simply means that if there had been one back there under that covenant that could have provided the obedience, then there wouldn't have been any need for Christ to come. But we know that that was not the case. And so when we read here, a new covenant, God making a new covenant under this system it would be described as the covenant of grace. In other words, all the promises of eternal blessing for the Lord's elect find their culmination in Christ coming and fulfilling what was promised. So again, based upon a substitute, based upon a satisfaction and the law having both the precepts and the penalty needing to be fulfilled. And I believe that that is a good description of what we're reading here in Hebrews 8, 7 through 13. Now, a second view or system is the dispensational system. And here, as people come to this scripture, all they can see is Israel. All they can see is Judah. And they translate it or interpret it in a very literal to refer to some future establishment of a kingdom by God on this earth, whereby the house of Israel and the house of Judah will be joined again. That's how it's read and interpreted. And indeed it would take a miracle because you remember in our studies in the Old Testament, Israel, as far as the 10 Northern tribes disappeared, there's nobody today that can ever go back and trace their roots to any of those 10 tribes. They're gone. They're intermingled with the Syrians, which became a Samaritan nation. And yet there are people, because of their literal views, of the scriptures here would say, no, but that's just like the resurrection. This has to come to pass. The Lord is going to raise up a whole new house of Israel and a whole new house of Judah, and they'll be brought together. And so under the dispensational system, everything in scripture is interpreted with Israel, the nation of Israel in view. For years, I was taught this and I struggled to try to understand the different systems and different dispensations. And as the Lord taught me the gospel, I began to see more and more of the fallacy of it, because it had God trying something, failing, starting again, the different dispensations. But ultimately, they believe that what we know as the church today And reading this, they would not apply this at all to the church. They would not apply this at all to any other than a Jew, because they say that the church exists only for a time. For them, the church exists from the day of Pentecost until a so-called rapture, when it'll be taken out. But God's real purpose is to get back to reestablishing Israel. And so that's how they would read this particular portion of scripture and many others. And I would have to say that it in no way fits the context of what we read in scripture. There was Israel as a nation for a season, but God preserved them for the purpose of bringing Christ into this world. And I believe you have to violate many scriptures that teach us that there is now neither Jew nor Greek. In Ephesians 2, where it says he made of both of both one man. Why would there be, there's always been God's purpose of one people. And so I reject that sort of system. But thirdly, and I don't want to dwell too long on these, but just to give you an idea, when you read, different men are coming from a different perspective. There is what is called promise theology. And I like a lot about what I read in promise theology. It just takes the word, it's somebody trying to understand how are we to put the Old and New Testament together? And this again has the promise theology has all they got is promise and spoke promise and spoken throughout the scriptures pointing to Christ and that being in the Old Testament. But then when we come to the new, we find the fulfillment. So some say, rather than talk about the old covenant and the new, although it is scriptural language, they like to look at the old as being the promise, the type, the picture, the prophecy, the new being the fulfillment. And that again is scriptural language. They go all the way back to Genesis chapter three and verse 15, where God promised to raise up a seed. There's a promise given there, which is the foundation of the gospel and the fulfillment we see in the New Testament. Again, you can approach this portion of scripture that we've read here in Hebrews 8 from that perspective, and I believe it would be true. A fourth way of approaching scripture is just purely what's called systematic theology. When I was back in seminary, this is the way I was taught. how to go through scriptures in a systematic way. When I wrote my thesis for my master's degree, I was given 10 themes, 10 doctrines that I had to defend. And it was based on a systematic approach of scripture. While at the time I thought that was a pretty good way of approaching scripture because that fit my logic in my mind, Yet, as the Lord taught me the gospel, I was brought to realize that it was that very system that was blinded me to seeing the message of Christ, because I was focused on man. I was focused on hermeneutics. I was focused on eschatology. I was focused on the doctrine of salvation. I was focused on these various compartmentalized topics of scripture and never saw the whole. I liken it to someone, and I don't recommend reading a book this way, but if there's an index in the back, imagine rather than reading a book from beginning to end, just turning to the index and say, I think I'll start with A and just go to that page and read what it has to say about angels. And then let's go back, let's go to B, and let's see what it has to say about behavior. You can read through scripture that way, as a topical index, systematizing everything. In fact, that's really one of the biggest divisions today with regard to scripture, Calvinism versus Arminianism. And people always want to know, are you a Calvinist? Are you an Arminian? What's your perspective? Eschatology, are you pre male or are you all male? They're trying to puts you into a system when in reality, all we ought to be doing is reading these scriptures and understanding them in their particular context. That's one of the problems with a systematic theology. You're just going through proof texting. And it's no wonder then that people are so divided over the word. One final way of describing our approach to scripture, which I like, is biblical. theology, biblical. In other words, you start with a Bible and you seek to draw out from the scriptures rather than just divide it up from their context, knowing what the particular theme and subject is, Christ and him crucified. Go through the scriptures verse by verse, seeing it laid out in its progressive revelation. That's really what I see here in Hebrews chapter eight. There's a progression. from old to new, from first to second, that some of these other views tend to deny. For example, those that hold to covenant theology that would say it's been done from the beginning. What they do is take away from how God has been pleased to reveal it. It has been purpose from the beginning, no question, but there is a working out in time. And what we have in scripture from Genesis to Revelation, I liken to a seed that's sown in the ground and then pushes up the plant and then blossoms into a flower. the flower, the full revelation. The seed is there, it always has. All that was purposed in Christ was in him, the seed, and yet the outworking of it, the fulfilling of it, we see throughout the scriptures. That's why I believe this book that we hold in our hand, both Old and New Testament, is a history of redemption. That's true biblical theology. His story, redemption, first in seed and type and picture promise and then in fulfillment. So having said that, by way of introduction, and I'm not trying this to be you know, intellectual in bringing these up. I know how our minds work. Every one of us fits somewhere in one of these and how we approach it, depending on how we've been taught. But I pray that we're taught of the spirit. But what do we learn here in Hebrews eight from this portion of scripture concerning God's covenants? There are a number of things here that I want us to consider. And as I mentioned to you, there's far more than what we can cover in the time we have. But let me just give these to you point by point. Again, going through this biblically, verse by verse. And the first is found here in verses seven and eight, that there are two covenants described by which God has been pleased to reveal himself and enter into relationships with sinners. Two covenants in verse seven, It's, we have the first, it's called the first and the second. The first and the second. Now, this is a very common way of describing the unfolding of God's eternal purpose of salvation. He purposed it to be this way. Why didn't he just cause Christ to be crucified at the beginning when the fall came? Why wasn't it that first seed of Eve that was the man-child? We have every reason to think that Eve was looking for it. When the Lord spoke of the seed of the woman crushing the serpent's head, when Cain was born, she said, I've gotten a man. That was her thinking. that somehow that was man, but it was to be proven just the opposite, that it would be thousands of years later that Christ would come. But nonetheless, it was foretold in the first, but the first was natural, temporal, tight, typical. You look over in 1 Corinthians chapter 15, in verses 45 and 46, Paul uses this same argument to describe the future bodily resurrection of the Lord's people. People wondered that. They said, well, you know, how's this take place? Well, he uses the example of even a seed that's sown in the ground. What comes out of the ground, it's similar, but it's not exactly like what went in. There's first the natural, and then he talks there about one glory of the sun, one glory of the moon, one of the stars. One star differs from another star in glory. So also is the resurrection of the dead, verse 42, 1 Corinthians 15, 42. It is sown in corruption. It is raised in incorruption. But the verse I wanted you to see is there in verse 45. And so it is written, the first man, Adam, was made a living soul. So you even have a first and a last here. Adam was there as a representative head of his race. He was, but he was made a living soul. In other words, he was created. The last Adam was made a quickening spirit. You see the contrast? In other words, life was in the last day to give life to those that he came to save. But you see in verse 46, how be it that was not first, which is spiritual, but what is natural and afterward that which is spiritual. This would be my argument against those who hold to the dispensational view that they say, well, everything's literal. Well, you get to revelation. Is there a literal change? that's wrapped around Satan, holding him? Can a physical chain actually hold a spiritual being? No, there's portions of scripture that as we read them, we understand that they are spiritually discerned. And I believe here in Hebrews chapter eight, when it refers to God making a new covenant with the house of Israel, with the house of Judah, it's pretty clear in the context that he's not talking about national Israel, because when you read over there in verse 10, I will put my laws in their mind and write them in their hearts and I will be to them a God and they shall be to me a people. He's talking about a whole new creation. He's talking like Paul referred to in Romans chapter two of the true circumcision, which is not of the flesh, but of the spirit. And those that are true Jews are those who are born of the spirit. That's who he's talking about. First, the natural. We can learn a lot from national Israel, going back and reading the Old Testament. But it was there as the natural. It was there as the type. It was there as the picture. But then the spiritual. You see, there was the first Adam, who was of the earth, earthy. But then the spiritual, the last Adam, who's the quickening spirit. I truly believe that unless we read the scriptures this way, we're going to stumble. and miss the message. The first covenant was a covenant of the Levitical priesthood made with the nation of Israel and delivered by Moses, yes, but it was a typical covenant. If we don't get anything else coming out of Hebrews, this ought to be clear in our minds, especially if you go back to what we saw already in Hebrews chapter seven and verse 11. says, if therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, for under it the people receive the law, what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchizedek? Not after the order of Levi or Aaron, but the order of Melchizedek and not be called after the order of Aaron. All right, and look in verse 18, for there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. And that's the same thing we see here. This is the way we read the scriptures. The people in the Old Testament of Israel were typical of the true Israel of God. If you see in first Peter chapter two and verse nine, and I want to give you these verses because some might say, well, you're just allegorizing, you're just spiritualizing. Well, with good reason, because that's exactly the tenor of the scripture. That's how God himself has taught us to interpret these scriptures. when he speaks of making this covenant with the house of Israel. Look at verse nine of first Peter two, but ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood and a holy nation, a particular or purchase people that you should show forth the praises of him who has called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. There's things to be learned from old Testament Israel being called out of Egypt. being brought forth, but it was all typical of the true Israel of God. In fact, over in Galatians chapter three, and I know some of these you're already familiar with, but as you deal with certain people who have not been under this type of preaching, I believe it's important in a very simple manner to show them why we believe what we do, why we read the scriptures the way we do. Here in Galatians chapter three, it says in verse 28, there is neither Jew nor Greek. Now we know that there's Jew and Greek culturally. That line of distinction still exists, but spiritually there's not. There's neither bond nor free. There's neither male nor female, for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And look at here, verse 29, if ye be Christ's, one chosen in him and for whom he died and called by his spirit, then are ye Abram's seed and heirs according to the promise." So in other words, everything promised back there to Abram concerning that seed that should come is ours and him, the true Israel of God. But also, secondly, I would say the blessings promised in the old, in the first, the way it's described here, were but shadows of good things to come. Over in Hebrews chapter 10, if you look with me there in Hebrews chapter 10, in verse one, that's exactly what we read, for the law having a shadow of good things to come. I believe that's important in understanding progressive revelation as well. Were they purposed from eternity? Yes, but they're described here as good things to come. Awaiting the coming of Christ and the putting away of sin and the establishing of righteousness in order that his people be declared righteous, in order that God might justly pronounce peace, in order that true forgiveness, these are the good things to come, forgiveness, full, free, and final, be established by one sacrifice. Justification, pardon, reconciliation, how? Through the body and soul of the Lord Jesus Christ. In Hebrews 10, Verses one through seven, I believe that's pretty clear. In verse four it says, it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. So you say, well, why God establish it then? Well, it was to serve as a type and picture of the one sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ and what God himself from eternity was looking to in order to justify a people. the death of his son. And that's why it says, wherefore, when he cometh into the world, he saith, sacrifice an offering thou wouldst not, but a body hast thou prepared me. It required a body in order for there to be satisfaction. There was no body in eternity. It was purpose there, but Christ had to come. And that's why we're reading verse seven. Then said I, lo, I come. in the volume of the book it is written of me." Not only in the volume of the Old Testament scriptures, but the book of God's eternal decree, it is written of him. Notice, to do thy will, O God. It had to be accomplished. It had to be set forth. So again, you see the progression, the sacrifices were pictures of Christ. One sacrifice, the mediators, were the priests who were types of Christ, our great high priest. So we see this distinction between the first and the second. But then coming back here to Hebrews 8, you notice also there's old and new. That's another way of describing it. In verse 8, the priest supposes an old when it says, for finding fault with them, he saith, behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant. So you think of that password game when they're trying to get someone to think of old, they might say new and wait for the person to say old. It's implied in what we read here. The new covenant, a new covenant implies an old covenant. But it also becomes clear when you get down to verse 13, because this is exactly the language of scripture in that he said a new covenant he hath made the first old. That's interesting the way it's put. I know in our scriptures, we divide it between old and new, but why is the old called the old? Well, it has to do with respect to its having been fulfilled. It wasn't old when Abraham lived. It was the revelation that God gave him at the time. So one might say, well, to him, it was new. But as we read the scriptures now, being completed and fulfilled, we understand that it's old because it's been fulfilled and done away. The second covenant is called new, not with respect to its origin. God purposed this from the foundation of the world, there's no question. But it's new, it's the new covenant in that it has been newly revealed. It's just from our perspective, it's newly revealed. But it's also called new because it is always, as God reveals its benefits and blessings to the heart of his people, to those blood-bought recipients by his spirit, it's new. When I think of how the Lord has taught me, and I see Christ in all the scriptures, it is ever new. The old has become new. As it says here, he hath made the first old. I believe when the Lord opens your eyes to Christ, you go back and even read the Old Testament. I'm not saying he set it aside or it's no longer scripture, but when you go back and read it, it's new. Because we don't, we're no longer under that legal condemnation. It's been put away. We're no longer under that system of sacrifice. It's Christ's one sacrifice makes it new. by God's grace to our heart. And it's called the new covenant because it's founded on a new principle. Here, the old, where was it written? On tables of stone. It's like that speed limit sign. It can't make you keep the speed. You can have it flashing by you, and the constant reminders, but it has no power. at all to enforce the law. That's the way it was with the old. But here in Hebrews 8 and verse 10, it says, I will put my laws into their mind and write them in their hearts. What is it but a new principle of grace and the spirit of God, Christ's spirit directing us. But the new is founded upon that everlasting covenant of God with Christ, but it still took Christ coming and fulfilling it. If you look over in Hebrews chapter 13 and verse 20, you see how all of these salutations and benedictions in scripture pertain to the work of Christ, coming, doing, dying. Now, the God of peace, How is he the God of peace? There was no peace established under that old covenant. It had to be a constant offering of sacrifices, could not put away sin. With the offering of sacrifices was a constant reminder of sin. But here it says the God of peace, why is he called the God of peace? That brought again from the dead, our Lord Jesus. It's all pertaining to his death. That's how he can be the God of peace. That great shepherd of the sheep, notice through the blood of the everlasting covenant. But again, don't misread that. It's not saying his blood was shed from everlasting, but it's the blood of that everlasting covenant. The covenant that God purposed in Christ required shed blood. Where was that blood shed? Jerusalem. in a body, in a soul. His soul was made an offering for sin. There was a sacrifice, a real sacrifice for sin, which was the accomplishment of that everlasting covenant and thereby peace made between God and those for whom Christ died. So you can see why there's a first and a second. You can see why there's an old and a new. Let me Move on to a second point here in Hebrews chapter eight, and that is verse nine, verses eight and nine. The first had faults. We saw that in verse seven. If that first covenant had been faultless, it's telling us it wasn't faultless. In fact, verse eight states it even plainer. For finding fault, notice, with them, What it's saying is that under that first covenant, God could never be satisfied with anybody's obedience. He could only always find fault with them, even their best efforts at keeping the ordinances and the sacrifices. Why? Because being conditioned on man. It was a conditional covenant and God purposely made it so. You know, the law was given, what does the scripture say? That every mouth might be stopped. And everyone, the world found guilty before him. There's still some people that never learned that lesson. They still think I can do better than the first generation. Let's go back and give it a shot. I'll tell you this, God never found any satisfaction in any man's obedience on this earth, but until Christ came. and worked out that righteousness, and then there was satisfaction. But finding fault with them, he saith, verse eight, behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. When it says, I will make it, it's implying an unconditional. God would do it. God would do it. The first was conditional upon man, and then just only, The law was added that sin might abound. It was just a light to make sin all the more manifest. But here in the second, we find it a work of God. God purposed the weakness of the first to prepare the way for the second. If you look in Jeremiah chapter 31, Jeremiah chapter 31, The only illustration I can think of right now is we lived down a dirt road in the town where I first began to preach when I went to Ivory Coast, two hours down this dirt road in the middle of the jungle. Probably about once a year, they would come through and grate the road. When they would grate it, you felt like you were on a highway. Just everything smoothed out. But that usually lasted about a week. When the timber trucks would come down through there and a little bit of rain, next thing you know, everything was right back to. And they kept talking, every political leader kept talking about there's gonna be a paved road, there's gonna be a paved road, there's gonna be a paved road coming. And you'd get your hopes up. Every time there was an election, somebody was gonna pave that road. But there was no satisfaction. As long as that dirt was there, I was there 14 years, and when I left, never did see a paved road. Never did. You'd get bouncing around on that thing, and if you thought you had any righteousness or sanctification within you, by the time you finished that dirt road, you knew you were nothing. But I liken that to the old. I mean, until there was satisfaction, there could not be. Whatever thought of perfection or righteousness, it would be completely manifest to be the opposite. But God purposed it that way. Here in Jeremiah 31, beginning with verse 31. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord. This wasn't God trying something for a while to see. and then saying, okay, I guess I'm gonna have to come up with something new. We read right here, even in Jeremiah, it was always purpose. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, with the house of Judah. This is where the writer of the Hebrews takes this. Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, which my covenant they break, So the point I want you to see is not according to the covenant. God has made a change. The first being conditional drives the death nail into anybody that ever thinks that there's salvation by works. He says, not according to the covenant, which they break. Although I was in husband unto them, saith the Lord, but this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days. After what days? The days of Christ coming, living, and doing and dying. After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts and will be their God and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor and every man his brother, saying, know the Lord, for they shall all know me from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord, for I will forgive their iniquity and will remember their sin no more. I'm gonna comment on that when we get to it, but you can see all the writer to the Hebrews did from verse eight all the way down to verse, actually verse 12 is just quote what we've just read here. You want evidence that the old is gone away and the new has been brought in. You want the evidence that the old was based on a conditional. Works, righteousness, which brought no perfection, the new based upon a righteousness that has been established and ratified by Christ and finished. Well, here it is, straight from the scriptures. But the thing I wanted you to see there, and we'll pick this up next time, you know, the question is being asked, hasn't God always seen his elect as justified? Hasn't he always seen their sin as forgiven? Well, why do we read here then, and their sins and their niceties will I remember no more. There was a remembrance of those sins until Christ came and put them away. Now God did not impute them to him. There was a non imputing of those sins. There was a covering for them based upon the atoning sacrifices, which that word means a cover, but It could only be said upon completion of Christ's death, God saying, I will remember their sins no more. There had to be a legal satisfaction in order for God to be just and justified. If we understand and read the scriptures from this perspective of biblical theology, promise and fulfillment, you see, there's no other conclusion we can come to. And you know what? There's no other conclusion I want. than that a blessed savior and sacrifice and substitute finished the work. He worked out a righteousness and God was satisfied. God was satisfied. All right, we're gonna leave it there for this week.