Here is the link to the study and discussion material for Lesson #10 (4th Quarter 2011): The Two Covenants

Here are some study helps: Study Helps, Lesson 10

I was hoping to spend some quality time with this week's lesson, but life has a way of throwing curve balls when you least expect it. Anyway, here are some thoughts on Sarah/Isaac vs Hagar/Ishmael....

We have seen that Abraham accepted God's promise and it was imputed to him as righteousness, apart from his own works. However, it took some time for the promise to be realized. Considering that Abraham and Sarah were still childless after 10 years, it is not really surprising that they got impatient. How many of us have been able to wait 10 years for a promise to be fulfilled?

At this point, they decided to help God along. Keep in mind that they did not intend to disobey God. Rather, they were going to help God fulfill His promise. So they hatched this fleshly plan.

Isn't that exactly the fundamental problem of the Old Covenant? God promised the people that He would make them a holy nation, and the people promised God that they would help Him. "All that You have said, we will do." Such presumption!

It is obviously sin when we choose to contradict God's will. But is it less of a sin to use the flesh in order to fulfill God's will? It may be more of a sin, considering that it is, at its root, a form of Satan's fall - I will be like the Most High. Plus, it is surely more insidious, since the sinner is trying to do God's will.

The law is beyond the sinner's ability to fulfill. It is only by accepting God's righteousness that we can have the necessary righteousness to meet the law's demands. We are saved by accepting God's gifts, not by replicating His righteousness. We must accept that we fall short, that we cannot do otherwise, and receive His promise of grace to fill our need.

Abraham and Sarah knew that it was beyond their ability to have children. But instead of allowing God to lay man's glory in the dust in His own way and in His own time, they chose a carnal method of "glorifying" God. They used their own resources to try to accomplish what can only be done by God's grace.

In contrast, when Isaac was finally conceived, it was obviously by God's special intervention. Though Abraham and Sarah had a part to play, it is clear that their part was insufficient for the task; God receives all the credit.

The same is true in salvation. Both the Old Covenant and New Covenant are founded on God's holy law. But the OC relied on man's ability to become holy. The NC relies solely on man's willingness to receive God's holiness. And if we try to mix our own human efforts to obey as a means of salvation, we contaminate God's plan. We would be as guilty as Moses when he hit the Rock.

Sadly, that's all the time I have for now.

Let's continue with the parable at hand. We have Isaac as God's promised gift. Were Abraham and Sarah supposed to do something before they were ready for the gift? Yes. They were to wait (25 years, it turns out). They were to trust. They were to refrain from carnal ways to fulfill God's promise. And on the more active side, Abraham had to perform the sacrifices to seal the covenant. Lastly, without getting into too much detail, Isaac was not a virgin birth. So yes, there was much to do.

Was there anything to do after the promised gift had been given? Yes. They were to "Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman." (Galatians 4:30) That means our fleshly plans and the fruits of such fleshly labors are to be cast away. Circumcision, I'm sure, was a clear reminder that our fleshly endeavors have no part in God's work. God's promises are not to be mingled with our profane works.

They were to take care of Isaac. That means everything that would hinder his growth and proper development were not to be tolerated. As much as Abraham loved Ishmael, he had to make a choice. The choice was clear, though extremely difficult. So also, if we are to cultivate our spiritual growth, we must abstain from everything that wars against the soul.

Faith in God must be maintained as the foundation of our Christian experience. After Ishmael was gone, and Isaac was left as Abraham's "only" son, God commanded Abraham to sacrifice the promised heir. Abraham's fleshly attempt to fulfill God's promise had been removed, and God commands Abraham: "Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you." (Genesis 22:2) Has Abraham now learned that God is able to fulfill His promises in spite of everything our human eyes can see and our human reason can understand? Or will he revert to trusting in his human ability to save the day? We know that Abraham, the father of faith, had learned that faith in God, no matter what, is the foundation of our relationship with Him.

Yes, there is a lot to do both before and after conversion. But on both sides of the fence, the key is to walk in the Spirit, not in the flesh. We need to understand that while invoking the Spirit's name in the act disobeying God does not constitute walking in the Spirit, using the arm of flesh as a means to meet God's standard of perfection does constitute walking in the flesh.

Both are required - faith and good works. We are saved unto good works. "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." "That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." Ellen observed:


Again, both faith and good works are the conditions of salvation.


I disagree. Ellen wrote:


Both the OC and the NC are based on righteousness by faith. The main difference has to do with the sacrificial services. Under the NC we are no longer required to sacrifice animals. Also, now that Israel failed to remain God's chosen nation, certain rules and regulations no longer apply to the Church.

We are not saved BY good works. Clearly, we are saved FOR good works, but not BY good works. "Not of works, lest anyone should boast."

The difference is huge. It is the difference between the OC and the NC. But it looks like we disagree there also. I'll post more later.

The difference was much more fundamental than that.

The OC was founded on righteousness by works. "Obey and live" was the requirement. Here's how the Israelites saw the plan of salvation:

What about your quote? I will address that next time.

Let's look at your quote from the original sources. It turns out that it is actually snips from two different articles in two different periodicals. The first article is "Hold Fast the Faith" from The Southern Watchman. The second article is "Our Work" from The Review and Herald.

Just from the titles, we can gather that they focus on different things. But somehow, they both refer to the covenant made at Sinai.


What is "this covenant" that is "of just as much force today"? Who made this covenant? The text clearly says that God made this covenant. It is the covenant, in summary, to make His people a holy nation.

Why did she bring this up? Here's what she wrote just before this:


She was talking about how we are to conquer, how we are to obtain power. And how do we do that? By accepting His promise to make us a holy nation.

How was Israel's salvation effected? Was it because they were such a strong nation, a powerful people? No. It was because God saved them, in spite of themselves. "Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself."

That covenant is in full effect today. The weakest of the weak can overcome if he allows God to save him. Today, as it was then, we can be freed from sin, not by our valiant efforts, but only as God frees us. This is how we are saved.



Here, we find a different aspect of truth. There is work for us to do. Yes, we are to obey.

However, we do not obey in order for God to save us. We cannot obey unless God saves us first.

Our obedience, our pledge to do all He has spoken, is a loving response to what He has already done for us. Our obedience is not what makes the New Covenant effective. Rather, it is the New Covenant being effective that makes our obedience possible.

Further, our obedience is our "part" of the bargain if we are to continue in the NC. This is where it could get confusing. Obedience is part of the NC, but not the means to effect the NC. It is the result of partaking of the NC.

In contrast, the OC required obedience in order to be saved. First you obey, then you live.

The NC, founded on better promises, is that you accept the life God is offering, then you obey.

Arnold, we agree the result of faith is obedience and righteousness. It is inconceivable He would require of the Jews a covenant impossible to keep. "God is true. He changes not. The conditions of salvation are ever the same. Life, eternal life, is for all who will obey God's law. {AG 136} "Under the new covenant, the conditions by which eternal life may be gained are the same as under the old. The conditions are, and ever have been, based on perfect obedience. {8MR 31.1}

He didn't require it of them. The NC has been available since Adam.

However, the Israelites, after being in bondage for 4 centuries, had lost sight of God's holiness and what it means to be His child. The had forgotten how high His standards are. The OC's purpose was make them realize the impossibility of earning God's favor by their obedience.


Yes, perfect obedience has always been required. The big difference is that in the OC, that obedience was to be rendered by the sinner - an impossibility. In the NC, that obedience has been rendered fully by Jesus; all the sinner needs to do is to receive it by faith.

I think our disagreement stems from your belief that your obedience can be improved to the point that it can be accepted by God as-is. I believe that even our best obedience must be cleansed by Christ's blood and His righteousness imputed to us.

Fellas, there are TWO meanings to OC,...remember?

I'll get to the NC just now.

The temporal OC was the sacrificial system, lasting from Adam till Golgatha, the promise of the everlasting covenant fulfilled, and this OC is true Gospel, of course: truly OT & NT. The other OC is the opposite of the NC, excluding as it does the new birth of justification by faith, thus foisting on the flesh the task of perfect obedience - which is a lost cause and utterly frustrating: Hence, Jn 3:3.

Again, there are two types of OC: sacrifices ordained by God to reconcile man to God - pointing to the sacrifice of the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world; the other OC is the will of man instead of submitting to the will of God by the new birth.

Obedience is the unambiguous will of God for us, so the experience of the NC: based on the new birth of true justification by faith, this obedience of faith is obvious to relate as the life of justification. But..., obvious only for justifition which is the experience of the new birth.