Skip to content

Jesus Christ is the Father’s “Yes.”

by randy on May 30th, 2010

…Another way to frame the issue is to ask what change has occurred, with the coming of Jesus Christ, to the covenantal sanctions supplied by the Lord to His people Israel in the Old Testament? The limits of this essay permit only a brief, introductory suggestion in answering this important question. That suggestion is to point the reader to the apostolic confession in 2 Corinthians 1:20: “For all the promises of God find their ‘Yes’ in Him. That is why it is through Him that we utter our ‘Amen’ to God for his glory.”

In Jesus of Nazareth, the promises of God and the fulfillment of their related obedience are united. He is the Mediator of the covenant, in whom is fulfilled everything written about the Messiah in the law, the prophets, and the psalms (Lk. 24:44). All the covenant promises given to Abrahm and his descendants find fulfillment in this Seed (Gal. 3:16). As the ultimate content of all the Old Testament promises, Jesus Christ is the Father’s “Yes.” As the Head and Savior of the church, He conducts the church’s responsive “Amen.” The believing “Amen” of all our prayers and petitions-including our prayers for our baptized children-is established by the person and work of Christ. Expressing continuity between the New Testament church and the Old Testament people of God, the hebrew word amen conveys the idea of firmness and reliability, and the utterance of ‘Amen’ in public or private worship after prayers and thanksgivings expresses confidence in the faithfulness of God and the certainty of His promises.  It is, in short, the voice of faith, setting to its seal that God is true (Jn. 3:33).
(Kloosterman, To You and Your Children [Wikner], pg. 56)

From → Doctrine

2 Comments
  1. Scott F. [via facebook] permalink

    Yes, the Christ of the covenants is the same, and the promises are fulfilled in Jesus, but the covenants themselves are different. Unless I don’t understand what “new”, “old”, “former”, “more excellent”, “better”, “obsolete”, “growing old”, and “vanish away” mean.

    • randy permalink

      The Mosaic covenant was new in relation to the Abrahamic. Yet at the same time they preached the same thing, the Christ to come. The Mosaic covenant did not change the promises or message of the Abrahamic. Both were covenants of grace, but varied in administrations. The concept of a new covenant wasn’t foreign to the people of Israel. There had been many “new” covenants.

      THE New Covenant is better because it is mediated by Christ, we have the fulfilled promises, fulfilled types and shadows and are no longer under the ministration of the Law whereby we receive covenant blessings/cursings based on obedience. The New Covenant not only preaches the same gospel as the Abrahamic and Mosaic, but the promises are ‘Yes’ and ‘Amen’ in Christ! It is much better considering we are no longer under the dispensation of Law but the dispensation of Grace.

      Do you really think reformed baptists and presby’s disagree (with scripture) that the New Covenant is better, more excellent or that the prior is obsolete, growing old, etc..?

      We merely maintain that the Law given was never intended to save, and as such still communicates God’s moral statues for his people. This is why the law is still useful for doctrine, reproof, correction, instruction in righteousness, etc… And why Paul can still use the law to derive doctrine.

Leave a Reply

Note: XHTML is allowed. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS