Ask yourself if you genuinely believe the “old covenant” was abolished by the one you call “Christ”.
And then maybe a few more questions:
Why was it there in the first place only to be removed?
Why did the Most High kill those who broke it if it was just gonna be replaced anyway?
Why did those under the natural people of the old covenant have to die for breaking the covenant but we foreigners and strangers don’t and have to die for breaking the new one?
How is that fair? How is that just?
And most importantly how can we believe the first covenant can’t be removed and replaced with a new one when each are called eternal? How can we trust these covenants?
And why would we trust the one swearing them with us?
If we swore and eternal covenant with another person and years later abolished it and swore another one in its place, we would be branded rightly and justly as untrustworthy.
So why would we believe our Heavenly Father would behave this way?
Question Evetything
templecrier.com
TTN Music 
TTN Ads 
Rhy Bezuidenhout
I personally do believe that a new contract can replace an old one.
As example, let's say a couple is put into an arranged marriage. They didn't love one another at first when they got married and therefore had a very strict contract in place. Over the following years their love grows and the relationship has developed into something new. They then decide to renew their vows and at the same time change their contract as they are now doing it out of love.
The first contract was for eternity. ✔
They do have the authority to nullify the previous contract without being penalised. ✔
They are in a position to have a new eternal contract setup to replace the old. ✔
The new contract can contain all of the first contract or none of it. ✔
My personal view is therefore that the new covenant does replace the old covenant as it is a better covenant. Both are eternal covenants, but the former still passes away when the new covenant is signed.
Delete Comment
Are you sure that you want to delete this comment ?