Dr. Jay Snell Newsletter Feed and Free Bonuses

The Third Great Error Upon Which This Current, Christian Theology of Denial Perches Precariously, Is Confusing "Will Make" in Jeremiah's Statement, "I will make a new covenant...", To Mean "Start Up Something That Never Was," When In Fact, It Means To "Complete That

In this section, we look at the third and final theological "footing" upon which The God-Looked-Down Theory so precariously perches. This "footing" is as unstable as the other two discussed previously. It is the misunderstanding by traditional theology of Jeremiah's expression translated by "will make" in Jeremiah 31:31, and quoted in Hebrews 8:8. However, before looking at "will make," we need to look at the ceremony that accompanied the Abrahamic Covenant.

The Ceremony of the Abrahamic Covenant

The Abrahamic Covenant existed as "promises" in the beginning. These promises are recorded in Genesis 12:1-3; 13:14-17. In Genesis 15, God placed the "promises" in covenant form through a solemn, sacred ceremony. In Genesis 17, God requires the circumcision of Abraham and his male descendants as a sign of their eternal fidelity to the covenant. In Genesis 22:15- 18, because of Abraham's fidelity to the covenant, God backs his Promise Covenant with his own oath. In this section we look closely at the ceremony described in Genesis 15. What kind of ceremony was it?

The Blood Covenant of Friendship

The ceremony in Genesis 15 was a form of covenanting common in the world at that time. Indeed, this form of covenanting was common in many parts of the world, from antiquity to the present. It was known as the Blood Covenant of Friendship, employed by man when he desired to make a binding covenant with another man or chose to make a binding covenant with his God. I am indebted to the book The Blood Covenant, by H. Clay Trumbull, for information on this form of covenanting. This book was first published in 1885 and is now available through Impact Books in Kirkwood, Missouri. Mr. Trumbull says, "One of these primitive rites, which is deserving of more attention than it has yet received, as throwing light on many important phases of Bible teaching, is the rite of blood-covenanting: a form of mutual covenanting, by which two persons enter into the closest, most enduring, and the most sacred of compacts, as friends and brothers, or as more than brothers, through the inter-commingling of their blood, by means of its mutual tasting, or of its inter-transfusion. This rite is still observed in the unchanging East, and there are historic traces of it, from time immemorial, in every quarter of the globe" (HCT pp. 4- 5). He further states, "There are many forms of covenanting in Syria, but this is the most extreme and sacred of them all. As it is the inter-commingling of very lives, nothing can transcend it. It forms a tie, or a union, which cannot be dissolved. In marriage, divorce is a possibility: not so in the covenant of blood" (HCT p. 6). "He who has entered into this compact with another, counts himself the possessor of a double life; for his friend, whose blood he has shared, is ready to lay down his life with him, or for him” (HCT p. 7). "There are indeed, various evidences that the tie of blood covenanting is reckoned, in the East, even a closer tie than that of natural descent; that a "friend" by this tie is nearer and is dearer, "sticketh closer," than a brother by birth" (HCT p. 10). "The oneness of nature which comes of sharing the same milk; or even than that which comes through having blood from a common source, by natural descent" (HCT p. 12). What does he mean by "intercommingling" or "sharing" blood? This question can best be answered by describing the six basic elements of the Blood Covenant of Friendship, and explaining what they mean.

The Blood Covenant of Friendship was always composed of as many as six basic elements. Those basic elements, or parts, are described below.

TERMS MADE PUBLIC

1. The terms of the covenant were made public. Each requirement of each covenanting party was published. Nothing was left out; nothing could be added later. None of the terms could be changed or modified; none of the terms could be abrogated.

BLESSINGS AND CURSINGS

2. Blessings were pronounced upon each contracting party if they adhered to the provisions of the covenant. Cursings were pronounced upon each party if he failed to live up to the terms of the Blood Covenant. (See Deuteronomy Chapters 27, 28.)

THE CUTTING

3. The covenant always involved the "cutting" of a sacrificial animal, their own bodies, or both.

THE FEAST

4. This involved two things. First, the flesh of the sacrificial animal was eaten. Second, the blood of the animal was drunk by both parties. They drank it in one of three ways: directly, mixed in juice or wine, or substituting juice or wine with no blood in it at all. They did the same thing with their own blood. (Of course, in no biblical account do they drink blood directly, or mixed with juice or wine.) Sometimes their wrists were cut and rubbed together, making them "blood brothers," (but not in scripture).

THE MEMORIAL

5. After the feast, they erected a memorial to perpetuate the covenant. This could be the planting of a tree, the piling up of stones, or dedicating a flock of livestock or sheep to reproduce without ceasing. This memorial served to remind all that a binding covenant existed between the contracting parties, which was as enduring as the life of the memorial itself.

THE GIFTS

6. Many times, the exchanging of gifts between the contracting parties accompanied the "cutting" of the Blood Covenant of Friendship. The gifts represent the desire of each heart to do something good for his blood covenant friend.

The mutual partaking of their own blood or the blood of the sacrifice symbolized the giving of their very lives to each other. The sacrifice was not viewed as the taking of a life, but rather as the giving of a life. From the time of the covenant, each was viewed as having given his very life to the other, to enforce and to guarantee the terms of the covenant. Each would defend the terms of the covenant to the other, laying his life down, if need be. In this sense, each considered himself to possess two lives; his own plus the life of his blood covenant partner. This was a covenant to the death. Leviticus 17:11 says, "The life of the flesh is in the blood." Even the heathen recognized this fact. The giving of the blood was the giving of life for the benefit of the other. The partaking of the blood represented life, but the partaking of the flesh of the sacrifice, represented nourishment provided by that life. As they partook of each other's lives (represented by their own blood and/or the common blood and flesh of a sacrificial substitute) so they were nourished. They shared a common life. Their care, support, upholding, defense, provision, and nourishment of each other is now complete. More than brothers, they are "blood brothers." They have entered the Blood Covenant of Friendship, and their lives now belong to one another. They are truly Blood Covenant Friends.

In the biblical record of the Blood Covenant of Friendship, not all six elements are present in each occurrence. This, however, is not necessary because this form of covenanting was common in the world and was understood by the readers of Scripture at that time. Moreover, there are enough of the six elements present to plainly identify the various occurrences as the Blood Covenant of Friendship. We briefly cite four instances of the Blood Covenant of Friendship that certain men initiated with other men in Scripture. The common characteristic of all examples cited is the translation of the Hebrew word KARATH by the English word "make" or "made." KARATH means "to cut." The KJV translates KARATH, "to cut" the covenant, by "make" the covenant. No complete exposition of the four passages are intended here. They are simply identified as the Blood Covenant of Friendship by listing those elements of the siz that are given in the passage that identifies them as such. The reader may study the individual passages for him/herself.

1. The Blood Covenant of Friendship between Abraham and Abimelech (Genesis 21:27-32).

• They "cut" the covenant (KARATH) (vv.27, 32).

• They explicated the terms of the covenant (v.23).

• The gift of sheep and oxen are exchanged (v.27).

• The memorial, composed of seven ewe lambs and a planted grove, are explicated (vv.27, 33).

2. The Blood Covenant of Friendship between Isaac and Abimelech (Genesis 27:26-33).

• They "cut" the covenant (KARATH) (v.28).

• They presented the terms of the covenant (v.29).

• The feast of eating and drinking is presented (v.30).

3. The Blood Covenant of Friendship between Jacob and Laban (Genesis 31:44-45).

• They "cut" the covenant (KARATH) (v.44).

• They cited terms of the covenant (vv.49- 53).

• They named the sacrifice (v.54).

• The feast is mentioned (v.54).

• They explicated the memorial, the "heap of witness," composed of a stone pillar, and stone heap (vv.45, 46).

4. The Blood Covenant of Friendship between Jonathan and David (1 Samuel 18:1-3).

• The "cutting" (KARATH) occurs (v.3).

• The gift is explicated (v.4). This Blood Covenant of Friendship between these two men was renewed (1 Samuel 20:13-20).

• The "cutting" (KAPATH) occurs (v.16).

• The terms are explicated (vv.13-23).

Because of the Blood Covenant of Friendship between Jonathan and David, even after the death of Jonathan, David cared for his son Mephibosheth. He said twice that he would show him kindness for Jonathan's sake (2 Samuel 9:1, 7). He restored to him all his land, had it tilled for him, had the fruits of the land gathered for him, and provided for him to always eat at his (David's) table (2 Samuel 9:1-13).

The examples cited above are all between man and man. But, the Blood Covenant of Friendship was also made between man and his god. H. Clay Trumbull says, "Beyond the idea of inspiration through an interflow of Godrepresenting blood, there has been in primitive man's mind (however it came there) the thought of a possible inter-communion with God through an inter-union with God by blood. God is life. All life is from God, and belongs to God. Blood is life. Blood, therefore, as life, may be a means of man's inter-union with God. As the closest and most sacred of covenants between man and man; as, indeed an absolute merging of two human natures into one,—is a possibility through an inter-flowing of a common blood; so the closest and most sacred of covenants between man and God; so the inter-union of the human nature with the divine,—has been looked upon as a possibility, through the proffer and acceptance of a common life in a common blood-flow" (HCT p. 147). Again he says, "Man longed for oneness of life with God. Oneness of life could only come through oneness of blood. To secure such oneness of life, man would give of his own blood, or of that substitute blood which could best represent himself. Counting himself in oneness of life with God, through the covenant of blood, man has sought for nourishment and growth through partaking of that food which in a sense was life, and which in a larger sense gave life, because it was the food of God, and because it was the food which stood for God" (HCT p. 184). He further says, "In the primitive rite of blood-covenanting, men drank of each other's blood, in order that they might have a common life; and they ate together of a mutually prepared feast, in order that they might evidence and nourish that life. In the out-reaching of men God-ward, for the privileges of a divine-human inter-union, they poured out the substitute blood of a chosen victim in sacrifice, and they partook of the flesh of that sacrificial victim, in symbolism of sharing the life and nourishment of Deity" (HCT p. 274).

In Genesis 15, God initiated the Blood Covenant of Friendship with Abraham. Moses recorded three of the six elements in this passage:

1. The covenant was "cut" (KARATH) (v.18).

2. The sacrifices are named (vv.9, 10). They were a three-year-old heifer, a threeyear- old she-goat, a three-year-old ram, a turtle dove, and a young pigeon. They were cut down the middle and probably stacked in two piles.

3. The terms are explicated (vv.13-21). The terms contained everything in the Sixty-Promises-(BARAK-EULOGIA)- Covenant that God had previously promised to Abraham. The Promises were brought under the authority of the Blood Covenant of Friendship.

During the process of this ceremony, Abraham passed under a deep sleep and a horror of great darkness fell upon him; at which time, when the sun had gone down, something that appeared to be a smoking furnace and a burning lamp passed between the pieces of the sacrificial victims.

In Genesis 17, God required the rite of circumcision as a token of the Blood Covenant of Friendship between himself and Abraham. This token included not only Abraham, but every male child who was eight days old, "...in your generations...." (Genesis 17:12). Abraham and his male descendants must shed their blood through circumcision as a token of the covenant between God. Abraham, and his seed. Nothing is mentioned, however, of God shedding his own blood, either directly or substitutionally; yet, the rite of circumcision lasted until the death of Jesus Christ. As a result of the Blood Covenant of Friendship God initiated between himself and Abraham, Abraham is the only man in all the Bible who is called by name, "the friend of God." Jehoshaphat asked the question, "Art not thou our God, who didst drive out the inhabitants of this land before thy people, Israel, and gavest it to the seed of Abraham, thy friend forever?" (2 Chronicles 20:7). Isaiah said, "But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend" (Isaiah 41:8). James said, "And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God" (James 2:23). Because of the Blood Covenant of Friendship ceremonialized in Genesis 15, Abraham became, henceforth the “Friend of God."

The Full Explanation of "Will Make in Jeremiah's Expression, "I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah"

As with Jonathan and David; who "cut" the covenant again (1 Samuel 20:13-20), Jeremiah prophesied that the Blood Covenant of Friendship between God and Abraham would be "cut" afresh, anew (KAINOS). He said, "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah" (Jeremiah 31:31). We have already seen that "new" is the translation of KHAWDASH, which means "new in quality." "Cut" is the translation of KARATH, which means literally "to cut." In other words, the Abrahamic Covenant, already in existence when Jeremiah prophesied, is to be "cut" anew at some future time. When is this future time? The author of Hebrews viewed it as the beginning of the Christian era or Church age. He quotes Jeremiah's prophecy almost verbatim (Hebrews 8:8-12), with a small commentary (v. 13). In verses 8 through 13, the English word "make" is used twice, once in verse 8 and once in verse 10. The English word "made" is also used twice, once in verse 9 and once in verse 13. All four uses, two "makes" and two “mades,” are the translations of four different Greek words, while "make" and "made" are just different tenses of the same English word. We shall examine these four words, beginning with verses 9, 10, 13, and look last at the instance in verse 8.

In Hebrews 8:9, the English word "made" is the translation of the Greek word POIEO, which means "to do" or "to make" some thing. Our English word "poem" comes from" POIEO. In this verse God is saying that his (KAINOS) "new" covenant will not be according to the Mosaic Covenant that he "made" (POIEO) with their fathers.

In verse 10, God said "...this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel…” In this verse, “make” is the translation of DIATHASOMAI. The Greek noun or word for covenant is DIATHAKA. The word translated "make," here, is simply the verbal form of the Greek word translated "covenant." "Covenant" becomes verbalized stating, "This is the covenant that I will covenant with the house of Israel."

In verse 13, "made" is the translation of PALAIOS, which means "to make old by declaration." This is a qualitative word which doesn't necessarily define "old" by referring to the ancient beginning of something. Rather, this word stresses the qualities caused by the passage of time without necessarily referring to its beginning. In this sense, PALAIOS must be distinguished from ARKAIOS, which menas “old with reference to its beginning point." PALAIOS, on the other hand, designates the qualities caused by age, i.e., old age, worn out, obsolete, etc. Trench says, "As often as PALAIOS is employed to connote that which is worn out, or wearing out, by age, it will absolutely demand KAINOS as its opposite" (RCT p. 253). Is PALAIOS used this way in verse 13? Is KAINOS used as its opposite in verse 13? Why is it necessary that only KAINOS and not NEOS be employed as its opposite when PALAIOS means "worn out by age"?

Yes, PALAIOS means "worn out" in verse 13, which states, "Now, that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away" (Hebrews 8:13). Yes, KAINOS is used as the opposite of PALAIOS. "New" is the translation of KAINOS. KAINOS is demanded as the opposite of PALAIOS in this case because both are qualitative words: PALAIOS representing the quality of "wear," and KAINOS representing the quality of "newness" because of some new twist given a preexistent entity, etc. For those cases where PALAIOS represents something old or ancient, with reference to a beginning, its opposite would then be NEOS, meaning new in time from a point of beginning.

This distinction is important. Why? Because as this verse is written, the comparison is between the "oldness in quality" of the Mosaic Covenant and the “newness of quality” of the KAINOS covenant. The verse compares "quality" with "quality." This is comparing, as it were, "apples to apples." If the "new covenant" was indeed "brand new," as taught by The God-Looked-Down Theory, NEOS would be used in the place of KAINOS. But, this would result in an "apples to oranges" comparison in this context, unless PALAIOS was changed to ARKAIOS, which means "new with reference to a beginning point." If in fact Hebrews 8:13 was comparing the "oldness in time," i.e., "old" with reference to a beginning point of the Mosaic legislation with the "newness in time," with reference to a beginning point of the "brand-new" covenant, ARKAIOS would have been used with NEOS. This would still be comparing "apples to apples." But, to view the (KAINOS) "new covenant" as "brand-new in time," i.e., "God's brand-new thing," in conjunction with PALAIOS in this context, is a comparison of "apples to oranges," i.e., new in time measured from a recent beginning point compared to the qualities of old age measured by wear. This is not so! The "new covenant" is new in quality, not in time. This "newness" quality is compared to the quality of "wear" of the Mosaic Law. Also, PALAIOS is in the Perfect Tense, which means a finished action, the results of which are still standing. Therefore, the standing result of the Mosaic Covenant is the quality of "being worn out." Unless one is prepared to accuse the author of Hebrews of comparing apples to oranges, one must view the (KAINOS) "new covenant," not as "brand new in time," but as a covenant already in existence, to which has been added a different characteristic, making it different, fresh, and new in quality. We have seen that Jeremiah 31:31, in the Hebrew Old Testament, uses the word KARATH or "cut," which is translated "will make" a new covenant (KJV). The author of Hebrews, quoting Jeremiah in Hebrews 8:8, uses the Greek word SUNTELEO to translate KARATH. This word is the combination of SUN, a Greek preposition meaning "together with," plus TELEO, meaning end or completion, and is translated by the expression "will make" (KJV). This translation, "I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel," sounds as though some future, brand-new covenant would be made by God with Israel. But, the word SUNTELEO will not permit this conclusion. In every instance where this word occurs in the Greek New Testament, it means to conclude, end or complete a preexisting thing or process. SUNTELEO never refers to a future, brand-new undertaking. It means to end, complete, conclude, finish, fulfill, or consummate. A quick look at every use of SUNTELEO in the Greek New Testament will demonstrate this. The parenthesis in the following phrases will show how SUNTELEO is translated:

• Matthew 7:28 "...when Jesus (had ended) these sayings...."

• Mark 13:4 "...when all these things shall (be fulfilled)?"

• Luke 4:2 "...and when they were (ended),..."

• Luke 4:13 "And when the devil (had ended) all...."

• Acts 21:27 "And when the seven days were almost (ended)...."

• Romans 9:28 "For he will (finish) the work...."

Even the noun form, SUNTELEIA, means "end."

• Matthew 13:39 "...the harvest is the (end) of the world:..."

• Matthew 13:40 "...so shall it be in the (end) of this world...."

• Matthew 13:49 "So shall it be at the (end) of the world:..."

• Matthew 24:3 "...and of the (end) of the world?"

• Matthew 28:20 "...unto the (end) of the world."

• Hebrews 9:26 "...once in the (end) of the world hath he...."

In every instance, in both the noun and the verb forms of this word in the Greek New Testament, SUNTELEO means "to end, finish, complete, fulfill, conclude, or consummate." As a matter of fact, Hebrews 8:8 may be the only place and time in the history of the world where this word SUNTELEO, which means "to complete the preexisting," is translated in such a way as to emphasize the beginning of something, i.e., "to start up something which has never been." And yet, in this same passage of Scripture, the translation "will make" calls for a brand-new undertaking. This is not so. The covenant Jeremiah said would be "cut" again was already in existence. The writer of Hebrews says that the preexisting covenant will be completed, not that God "will make" a brand-new covenant in the future. He sees Jeremiah's future "cutting" as the "completion" of the Abrahamic Covenant, which begins the Christian era.

In addition, the translation should be "the" new covenant, not "a" new covenant as in the KJV. This is so for two reasons: (1) The Greeks would omit the definite article when they were referring to only one of a kind (WDC p. 57). The Abrahamic New Covenant is definitely one of a kind. (2) A noun is made definite when it has a defining adjective (M III p. 179). In this verse, the noun "covenant" has a defining adjective "new" (KAINOS). Therefore, the meaning of verse 8 is that God will "complete" "the" covenant by "cutting." This "completion by cutting" is the quality "the" covenant did not previously have, and which gives it a "newness;" hence, the word KAINOS is used for "new in quality."

Furthermore, the above meaning of SUNTELEO is not hidden away. Current, Christian scholarship knows that SUNTELEO means "complete," (that which is in existence already) and in no way implies the "start up" of something new (that which did not exist before). Modern translations of the New Testament prove these assertions:

1. The Emphasized New Testament: A New Translation by J. B. Rotherham translates SUNTELEO in Hebrews 8:8 by "...I will conclude...."

2. The New Testament: An American Translation by Edgar J. Goodspeed translates SUNTELEO in Hebrews 8:8 by "...I will conclude...."

3. The New Testament of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, American Bible Union Version by John A. Broadus et al, translates SUNTELEO in Hebrews 8:8 by "...I will complete...."

4. The Twentieth Century New Testament translates SUNTELEO in Hebrews 8:8 by "...I will ratify...."

And yet, no one challenges, openly at least, the tradition that God "started up" a covenant which had not existed before. Tradition dies hard. But, thank God, somebody once openly challenged the tradition that the earth was flat! In like manner, The God-Looked-Down Theory must now be challenged openly and discarded.

The Completion on Golgotha of Abraham's Covenant by Jesus, the Seed of Abraham, Who Was Both God and Man

How was this "completion by cutting" of the Abrahamic Covenant accomplished? It was accomplished in the person of Jesus Christ, who in the days of his flesh was both God and man. How he came to be both God and man is best understood by examining the Greek word EPISKIADZO. This word combines EPI, a Greek preposition meaning "over or upon," with SKIADZO, meaning "shadow." This word is used five times in the Greek New Testament and is always translated "overshadow." Each use of this word concerns the Spirit of God coming upon human flesh, enabling it to accomplish what it could not accomplish apart from the power of God. In Matthew 17:5; Mark 9:7; and Luke 9:34, a cloud "overshadowed" Peter, James, and John enabling them to hear the voice of God, which said, "This is my beloved Son." In Acts 5:15, the people brought the sick so that the shadow of Peter might "overshadow some of them." "They were healed everyone" (Acts 5:16). In Luke 1:35, the angel said unto Mary, "The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” In Matthew 17:5; Mark 9:7, and Luke 9:34, the "overshadowing" enabled Peter, James, and John to audibly hear the very voice of God. In Acts 5:15, the "overshadowing" enabled human flesh to be healed by the power of God. In Luke 1:35, the "overshadowing" enabled Mary, in the flesh, to produce an offspring which was both God and man.

As man, Jesus was the seed of Abraham. "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ" (Galatians 3:16). "It (the law) was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promises were made;…” (Galatians 3:19). "For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham" (Hebrews 2:16). As the seed of Abraham, Jesus was circumcised into the Abrahamic Covenant. "And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called Jesus, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb" (Luke 2:21). Jesus viewed circumcision as the token of the Abrahamic Covenant, not as having originated with Moses. "Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision: (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers;) and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man" (John 7:22).

In addition to being the seed of Abraham, Jesus is also God in human form. In Matthew 1:23. Jesus is called "God with us." "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is God with us." In Hebrews 1:8, the Son is called "God," by God himself. "But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom." In 2 Corinthians 5:19, God himself is said to be in Christ. "To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself." In John 1:1 and 1:14, both Jesus and God are called "the Word" and are seen as the same person. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (v. 1). “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth" (v. 14). Finally, in Acts 20:28, Paul says that the blood of God himself, paid the purchase price for theredemption of a world of lost sinners. "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers to feed the church of God. which he hath purchased with his own blood."

Jesus was born of a woman that he had created with his own hands. As a tiny baby in Bethlehem's manger, he weighed just a few pounds. Yet, he was bigger than the mother who gave him birth. When he was just minutes old, lying in Mary’s arms, he was eons older than she. He was so helpless as a baby, yet even then his power kept the planets his own hands had made in their icy tracks. As a little child, he knew nothing, save the security of his mother's breasts. Even then, somehow, "Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world" (Acts 15:18). Here, in a stable in Bethlehem cradled in his mother's arms, lies the one who cradles all of creation, including his own mother in his own arms. It staggers our minds to think that 2000 years ago, God was born of a little Jewish virgin, entered the stream of human existence, and actually lived and walked on this planet as a human being. And we stand amazed, even more, when we realize that some 33 years later, this same God in human flesh, mounted a cruel cross on Golgotha's rugged brow, and gave up his own life, completing the Abrahamic Covenant; fulfilling the demands of Moses' Law, thereby delivering the eternal salvation promised Abraham. Jesus' "completion by cutting" contains all six elements of the ceremony attached to The Blood Covenant of Friendship. When the promises were "ceremonialized" in Genesis 17, God required Abraham and his male descendants to shed their blood as a token of their fidelity to the Abrahamic Covenant. Nothing, however, was said of God's blood. But now, it is His own blood that must be shed, to complete forever the ceremony begun between God and Abraham (Acts 20:28). Again, no sacrificial animal will do. The "cutting" is in the human flesh of God himself. (The six elements of the Blood Covenant of Friendship completed by Jesus on Golgotha are listed below):

THE CUTTING

1. The cutting began with the scourging (Matthew 27:26; Mark 15:15). They scourged a malefactor in those days with a Roman cat-o-nine-tails: a whip with small whips on the end. They attached to the end of each small whip a sharp, jagged piece of metal or bone. They stripped the victim at least to the waist. Each time the whip struck, bits of flesh and skin were torn away by the jagged bone or metal teeth of the whip. It was not uncommon for the whip to completely surround the victims body, striking him in the face, chest, and stomach. Eyes could be gouged out, teeth knocked down his throat, even his face torn away. The whip cut his stomach so that it lay open, the inner organs spilling down his front. The beating left his back a lacerated mass. Jesus, God in human flesh, endured such a scourging. The "cutting" had begun. The blood was drawn.

They jerked his beard from his face (Isaiah 50:6), leaving it a bloody mess. They blind-folded and hit him in the face (Luke 22:63). They (Roman soldiers) crowned him with a crown of thorns (Matthew 27:29). The thorns surely dug into his skin, also causing the blood to flow. The "cutting" progressed.

With his back, neck, and shoulders beyond recognition, resembling a mass of raw meat, they clothed him in a scarlet robe, put a reed in his right hand, and mocked him, saying, "Hail, King of the Jews" (Matthew 27:29). They spat on him. They took the reed from his hand and hit him in the head with it. They then took off the scarlet robe and put his own garment on him and led him away to be crucified (Matthew 27:30-31). Simon, of Cyrene carried his cross (Luke 23:26). On the way to "the place of the skull," he spoke briefly to the women (Luke 23:28- 31), the blood still flowing.

Having ascended Golgotha, they fastened him to the cross with three iron spikes seven inches long. The feet that had walked the sandy shores of beautiful Galilee were now nailed together with one spike to the cross. The hands that had ministered to the poor and needy were nailed separately to the cross, first one hand, then the other. The "cutting" was now in full force as his blood ran freely. Yet, in his heart and Spirit, he ministered even unto death (Luke 23:34; 42, 43). Finally, after he gave up his blood and very life, the Roman spear penetrated his heart, blood and water poured forth. The "cutting" was complete. That which began 2000 years before between God and Abraham was complete. Beginning with Animal substitution, followed by Abraham’s blood in circumcision. God completed the “cutting" by the drawing of his own blood (Acts 20:28). The Abrahamic Covenant now has the additional quality of "completion by cutting;" hence, the use of (KAINOS) rather than NEOS, meaning" new in quality." Now, we can define with precision the meaning of new (KAINOS) when used in the New Testament in conjunction with the word covenant. The expression "new covenant" in the New Testament, means, "The Abrahamic Covenant made complete by the cutting of Jesus' flesh and the drawing of Jesus' blood." Below, we list every occurrence in the New Testament of the expression, the new (KAINOS) covenant. The above expanded definition of KAINOS plus covenant is substituted for the simple and inaccurate "new" covenant in the King James translations of each occurrence. The following translations, then, enable the reader to see at a glance, this exact definition and what it means in the various verses where KAINOS plus covenant occur:

1. (Luke 22:20) "Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the Abrahamic Covenant made complete in my blood (by the cutting of my [Jesus'] flesh and the drawing of my blood) which is shed for you."

2. (1 Corinthians 11:25) "After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the Abrahamic Covenant completed in my blood (by the cutting of my [Jesus'] flesh and the drawing of my [Jesus'] blood): this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me."

3. (2 Corinthians 3:6) "Who also hath made us able ministers of the Abrahamic Covenant made complete by the cutting of Jesus' flesh and the drawing of Jesus' blood...."

4. (Hebrews 8:8) "For finding fault with them (the people), he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will complete (SUNTELEO) the Abrahamic Covenant (by the cutting of Jesus' flesh and the drawing of Jesus’ blood) with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.”

5. (Hebrews 9:15) "And for this cause (his shed blood and offered life in v. 14), he is the mediator of the Abrahamic Covenant made complete (by the cutting of Jesus' flesh and the drawing of Jesus' blood), that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance."

In addition, this same act of death was the final sacrifice for sin under Moses' Law, terminating the Law forever. Jesus' death not only ratified Abraham's Covenant with God's blood, but terminated Moses' Law with God's blood.

THE TERMS

2. The terms of the concluding ceremony, the "completion by cutting," were the promises of health, wealth, and salvation made to Abraham. Hebrews 9:15 says that Jesus became the mediator of the covenant that had been "completed by cutting." "And for this cause (the given blood of Christ in verse 14) he is the mediator of the new (KAINOS) testament or covenant (DIATHAKA), that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament (covenant), they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance" (Hebrews 9:15). Prior to the "completion by cuttiing,” all the provisions of the Abrahamic Covenant came through Abraham to his heirs. After the "completion by cutting," all the provisions of the Abrahamic Covenant comes to the Abrahamic Seed Group through Jesus, the ultimate seed to whom the Abrahamic promises were directed. In other words, prior to the death of Jesus, Abraham mediated the blessings. After Jesus' death, Jesus himself mediates the blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant.

The Christian community universally maintains that Jesus' death secures the redemption for transgressions after his death. And, in Hebrews 9:15, we learn that Jesus' death also secured the redemption for the transgressions that occurred prior to his death, i.e., those that were under the first, or Mosaic Testament or Covenant. (The author uses their term "first" to communicate in their ballpark. Moses' Law was to them "first" in priority, as they had disconnected Moses from Abraham. But, in actuality, the Abrahamic Covenant was "first" in time to Moses.) We also learn that the redemption from transgressions that were under the "first" covenant is the condition upon which the promises of eternal inheritance might be received.

We saw that the Abrahamic Covenant established an eternal relationship between Abraham and God which included Abraham's heirs. We saw that God added the Law 430 years later, to guard his heirs against losing this preexisting relationship because of their transgressions. This act of grace, the Law, functioned as their schoolmaster, teaching them what constituted sin and providing a system of sacrifices when they sinned. God never intended for their obedience in performing the appropriate sacrifice to blot out their sin. Instead, it provided a "covering" which enabled God to "wink at it," to temporarily overlook it. As a result, God deferred judging or dealing with their sin until Christ came. He then judged and forgave all Old Testament sin for the obedient Remnant based on the blood of Christ. Galatians 3:23, 24 says that the Law temporarily guarded the Remnant only until Christ, the object of faith, “came.” But before the faith came, they were guarded under the Law, being shut up (for their protection) until the faith (comes) which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore, the Law was our schoolmaster, (lasting) until Christ (came) that we might be justified by faith."

Romans 3:25, as well as Hebrews 9:15, says that Christ's death and blood secured redemption for Old Testament sins committed by the obedient Remnant. "Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God." "Remission" is the translation of PARESIS, which means "a passing over, a temporary overlooking, a suspension of judgement, and a withholding of punishment." "Forbearance" is the translation of ANOCHE, which means a holding back, a delay, and "withholding of punishment." The appropriate Old Testament sacrifice enabled God to defer dealing with the sins of the saved, Old Testament Remnant until the death of Christ. Upon Christ's death, God "moved" those sins committed by the saved, Old Testament Remnant under the blood of Christ. In so doing, he no longer "winked at them." Rather, he "washed away" the sins of the Old Testament Remnant, having moved them under the blood of Jesus! Only then were they "redeemed."

In Hebrews 9:15, the Sacred Writer makes the expression "redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament (covenant)" and the expression "receive the promise of eternal inheritance," (which we previously saw was EULOGIA, or health and wealth in addition to salvation) depend on each other. He also made their dependence on each other, rest entirely upon the Sixty- Promises-BARAK-EULOGIA contained in the Abrahamic Covenant. In other words, the complete "Inheritance" of the Abrahamic Covenant could not be received until the "Redeemer" (and his redemption) came. (See Promise 60.) And the Redeemer could not come, indeed, he would not exist apart from the same Abrahamic Covenant that declared the "promise of eternal inheritance." Therefore, these expressions are not only dependent on each other, their dependence on each other depends solely on the Abrahamic Covenant since both provisions (Redeemer and Inheritance) are explicated by it. And, unless one can prove beyond a doubt that Old Testament salvation, health, and wealth were not derived from Abraham's EULOGIA Promises, then the expression, "promise of eternal inheritance" must be a synonymous phrase with "the Abrahamic-Sixty Promises- (BARAK-EULOGIA) Covenant." Since Old Testament salvation, health and wealth were in fact based upon Abraham's Promises, then these two expressions, “redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant" and "receive the promise of eternal inheritance" link together the Abrahamic Covenant and Old Testament salvation, health and wealth in one New Testament verse.

But this isn't all this New Testament verse accomplishes. This verse also links this Old Testament salvation, health and wealth, based on the Abrahamic Covenant to the "new (KAINOS) Covenant" (which is the ratification with Jesus' blood of the same Abrahamic Covenant), by showing that the contents of the "new" (KAINOS) covenant which Jesus mediates during the Church age, is in fact the contents of the Abrahamic Covenant, which, as we have seen, endures "forever," spanning both Old and New Testament eras. In other words, the content of the Abrahamic Covenant and the content of the "new (KAINOS) covenant," mediated by Jesus, are one and the same. This assertion is strengthened by defining more precisely who the author meant by his expression "they which are called might receive...."

"They which," is the translation of OI, meaning "the ones." Who are "the ones"? Since "the ones" are to "receive the promise of eternal inheritance," which is a synonymous phrase with "the Abrahamic Covenant," then "the ones" are none other than Abraham and the Abrahamic Seed Group. And since we proved in Volume I that the Abrahamic Seed Group includes Isaac, Jacob, and Israel before the Law, the Remnant of Israel after the Law, and all Christians during the Church age, then "the ones" in Hebrews 9:15 includes the "saved" of both the Old and New Testament ages. The author of Hebrews demonstrated that "the ones" included the saved of both the Old and New Testaments by including himself and all Christians in the salvation based on the Abrahamic Covenant. For a full discussion of this, see Volume IV, How To Obtain Abraham's Blessings.

Common sense also demonstrates that "the ones" is the Abrahamic Seed Group of both Testaments. Who else would be in a position to receive anything from Abraham’s promises except those who were included in them? Only the Abrahamic Seed Group, the saved Old Testament Remnant of Israel, those saved descendants of Abraham, those of Israel who composed the Old Testament "Membership Roster" of the Abrahamic Seed Group could receive "the Abrahamic promise of eternal inheritance." No one else could receive this inheritance. And Christians receive the same inheritance for the same reason, their inclusion in the Abrahamic Seed Group.

Further proof that "the ones" includes the Abrahamic Seed Groups of both Testaments is provided by the universal belief of all but a few Christians; the "new" covenant spans the entire Church age and includes all Christians within it borders. And since we proved in Volume I that Christians now compose the "Membership Roster" of the Abrahamic Seed Group, it is no wonder that the author of Hebrews includes himself and all Christians, as well as "the ones redeemed from Old Testament transgressions" in the salvation based on the Abrahamic Covenant. In other words, the same salvation, health and wealth derived from the same Abrahamic Covenant, extending to Abraham and his one and only Abrahamic Seed Group which began with Isaac, then included Jacob, then took in the saved Remnant of Israel after the Law, and finally enclosed all Christians within its borders is what we have here. The same salvation, health and wealth, based on the same covenant, for the same Abrahamic Seed Group, and attested by (1) the author's inclusion of himself and all Christians in this same "eternal inheritance," (2) common sense, and (3) universal Christian belief is the thrust of Hebrews 9:15.

To summarize what we have said so far about Hebrews 9:15, we list the following:

1. The salvation, health, and wealth in the Old Testament and under the new covenant is the same salvation, health, and wealth.

2. Old Testament salvation, health, and wealth and new covenant salvation, health, and wealth, being the same, are based upon God’s covenant with Abraham.

3. This same salvation, health, and wealth based on the Abrahamic Covenant is mediated by one person, Jesus Christ, to the saved of both Old and New Testament ages.

4. Those who obtain this salvation, health, and wealth mediated by Jesus Christ are in fact in the Abrahamic Seed Group, spread out over thousands of years of time.

In addition, "are called" is the translation of KALEO, which means "to call." The form of KALEO here, is the Perfect Passive Participle, and should be translated "having been called." Passive means the calling was not done by themselves but by one other than themselves. In other words, God alled them. The Perfect Tense means the calling occurred in the past, but the results of that calling still exist in present time. The rule for the Perfect Participle states that unless the context indicates otherwise, the time of the action denoted by the participle occurred in time prior to the time of the main verb, with the results of that previous action still standing at the time of the main verb. The main verb in verse 15 is "is," which is in the Present Tense. In other words, in the past, God made promises to Abraham and his seed group, calling them with those promises to an eternal inheritance. (For a fuller discussion of the Christians' Abrahamic Inheritance, see Volume I, What Are Abraham's Blessings Anyway?) The results of this calling action contained in the Sixty- Promises- (BARAKE-ULOGIA) - Covenant are still standing, i.e., The Abrahamic Seed Group is still called to an eternal inheritance at the time of the writing of Hebrews 9:15. To put it differently, the Abrahamic Covenant is still valid.

Note well that the author of Hebrews includes himself and all Christians within the borders of the Abrahamic Seed Group because Christians make up that group. Since the Perfect Tense denotes that the "calling" extended to the Seed Group is "still standing," and Christians are that Seed Group as well as those in the Old Testament era, the same salvation, health, and wealth contained in that “calling still standing,” based on the same Abrahamic Covenant, is the same for both the Old and New Testament ages.

This is amazing! Salvation, health, and wealth in the Old Testament were based solely upon the Abrahamic Covenant. Moses' Law guarded those blessings temporarily. Verse 15 speaks exclusively of the relationship of Christ to that Old Testament "inheritance." The "called group," that is, the Abrahamic Seed Group in verse 15 was the obedient Remnant of Abraham's promises. The author, throughout Hebrews, includes himself as well as all Christians in that same, Old Testament Seed Group. But notice! The author is a Christian. He is in the Church age, under the so-called “new covenant." He is a member of God's "brand-new thing"—the Church, and Jesus is said to be the mediator of God's "brandnew covenant." What then, is the content of that which Jesus mediates in God's socalled "brand-new covenant"? According to Hebrews 9:15, Jesus is mediating the Old Testament "inheritance" of salvation, health, and wealth (the same promise of eternal inheritance given Abraham and the Remnant) to the self-same Old Testament "called group." In addition, the author includes himself, and all Christians, not in a brand-new unheard of group called the "Brand-new Covenant Church" taught in the God-Looked-Down Theory, but in "the ones called" group which spans both Testament eras. He makes no distinction between himself and both the Old and New Testament Remnant. He makes no distinction between salvation based upon the Abrahamic Covenant and the salvation he presently enjoys; for the body known as the Remnant in the Old Testament and the body known as the Church in the New Testament are the same group. Both are the Abrahamic Seed Group. Even though the "calling" occurred prior to Jesus' death, the results of that "calling" are still standing, and the author of Hebrews included himself, and all Christians in those standing results. Jesus mediates (dispenses) in the New Testament era the content of the same "calling" to salvation, health, and wealth that they had in the Old Testament, which was based upon the Sixty Promises-(BARAKEULOGIA)- Abrahamic Covenant Structure.

To argue that the "new (KAINOS) covenant" is not the historic unfoldment of the Abrahamic Covenant leaves us wondering why the content of the "new (KAINOS) covenant," mediated by Jesus in Hebrews 9:15, is the Old Testament inheritance of salvation, health, and wealth which is in fact, based upon the Abrahamic Covenant. In addition, if the "new (KAINOS) covenant" is not the historic unfoldment of the Abrahamic Covenant, since Jesus is to be mediating the "promise of eternal inheritance," attributed to the Old Testament era, one must be prepared to prove that salvation, health, and wealth in the Old Testament were not based upon the promises to Abraham. The Jews attempted this by disconnecting the Law, apart from Abraham, as a "plan of salvation." This will accrue to their eternal regret. But, if the Old Testament salvation was "disconnected" in some way from Abraham, then what was Old Testament salvation based on?

Finally, since Jesus is mediating Old Testament salvation in Hebrews 9:15, both to those before and after the cross, then, if the Church is not the historic unfoldment of the Abrahamic Covenant, we are forced to conclude that Jesus is mediating one thing to the "called group" of verse 15, but mediating something entirely different to “another group" (Brand-New-Covenant-Church- Entity-Thing) proclaimed to us by The God-Looked-Down Theory. But, what else is he mediating and where is the Scripture that defines it? Who is this "other group-entity-thing" and where is the Scripture that identifies them? Is it possible there are two churches, one based on the Abrahamic Covenant and the other pulled from thin air, both claiming Jesus as its Savior? No! The Church is the historic unfoldment of the Abrahamic Covenant. The terms of the "cutting" of the flesh of God, in human form that day on Golgotha's rugged heights, was the full force of everything God promised Abraham and his Seed Group in the Sixty Promises-(BARAK-EULOGIA) Covenant.

We must keep in mind that no eternal inheritance of health and wealth, in addition to salvation, was possible under their so called "first covenant." Remember, their "first covenant" was Moses' Law separated from Abraham's promises. As such, it was a doctrine of works. Consequently, it never produced salvation, health or wealth for anyone who followed this flawed theology. We have shown previously (The Contrary to Fact Condition) that the author of Hebrews considered their doctrine of the “first covenant" to be fatally flawed.

In addition, nowhere in Hebrews does the author even imply that their "first covenant" ever produced any form of an inheritance for them, eternal or otherwise. Even his expression in Hebrews 9:15, "redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant" contains no hint that their "first covenant" produced any form of inheritance for them. In the above expression, "under" translates the Greek word EPI, which in this context, means "during the time of." This word, EPI, also means "during the time of" in 2 Corinthians 1:4; Ephesians 4:26; and 1 Thessalonians 3:7b. In other words, the author declares that Jesus mediates the inheritance provided by the Abrahamic Covenant and protected by Moses Law "during the time covered" by their socalled, erroneous, "first covenant." He absolutely, nowhere, even hinted that the inheritance was “produced by” their flawed theology. By no stretch of the imagination, can anyone make "during the time of" mean the same thing as "produced by." Their flawed theology, their "first covenant," produced the damnation of their souls and nothing more. It could not, and did not produce either the redemption, or the inheritance spoken of in the Old Testament. To think otherwise is to give a Category One meaning to a Category Three statement.

If we attribute the inheritance mentioned in Hebrews 9:15 to their so called "first covenant," then we accept The Great Disconnect Theory (Moses disconnected from Abraham) as a fact, and must admit that salvation in the Old Testament really was achieved by works, i.e., by keeping Moses’ Law. But, if we allow this, since Jesus is now mediating the same Old Testament salvation (inheritance) during the Church age, then we must conclude that Jesus is mediating a Christian salvation which requires Christians to be saved by works also, i.e., Christians must also keep Moses' Law to the letter. This, of course, is not so. Unfortunately, this is the logical conclusion of the teachings of The God- Looked-Down Theory, i.e., of traditional, Christian theology

Paul buttresses the above discussion by his assertion in Galatians 3:8. He equated "Christian gospel" with the Abrahamic Covenant, specifically Promise 8. He said, "And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed." In other words, the "gospel" and Promise 8. "In thee shall all nations be blessed," mean the same thing. "Preached before the gospel" is the translation of PROEUANGEL-IDZOMAI. This Greek word combines PRO, meaning "before," and EUANGEL-IDZOMAI, which means to "evangelize" or to "preach." Thus, the consolidation of these two mean "to preach the gospel beforehand" to Abraham. (See Vincent's Word Studies of the New Testament, Volume IV, p. 117.) To put it differently, Paul declared that before the Church age began, the Christian gospel of "salvation of the heathen by faith" was preached to Abraham as Promise 8. Of course God did the preaching. But God and his Word are the same, and since the Scriptures are God's Word, Paul personifies the Scriptures as God's preaching. In this passage, the "gospel" that covers the so-called "New Covenant Age" and Promise 8 of the Sixty Promises- (BARAK-EULOGIA)-Covenant God made to Abraham and his Seed Group are the same. In Hebrews 9:15, the so-called new covenant that Jesus mediated to the Old Testament saved Remnant was also the Sixty Promises-(BARAK-EULOGIA). So then, the "gospel," the content of the "new (KAINOS) covenant" and the "Sixty Promises- (BARAK-EULOGIA)- Covenant" are the same. These terms are simply synonymous of each other. Since the gospel, the content of the new (KAINOS) covenant and the Abrahamic Covenant are all synonymous terms, and since we've seen in Volume I that the Abrahamic Covenant is still in force for Christians, then why do we need a socalled "new covenant" proclaimed by The God-Looked-Down Theory? To persist in this theory means that Scripture contains two covenants, existing side by side, that provide the same things. The Abrahamic Covenant provides Jesus, the Savior and Mediator. So does the so-called "new covenant." The Abrahamic Covenant provides the gospel. So does the so-called "new covenant." But, the Abrahamic Covenant provides health and wealth for the Seed Group. The so-called "new covenant" does not because it has so carefully disconnected itself from Abraham. And yet, in Galatians 3:8, "blessed" is the translation of EULOGIA, which still includes health and wealth in addition to salvation when applied to the Abrahamic Seed Group. Of course, this verse is addressed to the Seed Group. (The reader should apply the Eight Questions of Scripture Analysis to this verse.)

The writer of Hebrews 9:15 was not swayed by the Fulfillment Theory. If the Abrahamic Covenant ran its course, and was terminated in Joshua's day, this author was unaware of it. Neither was he aware that the Jews had to occupy the land (The Residential Theory) since they obviously were not occupying it in the manner prescribed by Moses when he wrote this book. In addition, if the Division Theory had any substance at all, he would have mentioned it here. There is, however, no mention of any division of salvation from healing and prosperity here (or anywhere else) for the simple reason that no division of Abraham's EULOGIA exists.

Finally, even a superficial reading of Hebrews 9:15 reveals that this author rejected entirely the view that Abraham's Covenant and faith are simply our examples (The Example Theory). In linking Jesus' ministry as Mediator to it during the Church age, he shows once once again, its continuing force as a reality, not just an "Example of Faith."

THE MEMORIAL

3. In the Blood Covenant of Friendship between Abraham and Abimelech, we saw that Abraham planted a grove of trees as a memorial. In the Blood Covenant of Friendship between God and man which Jesus "completed by cutting," he also planted a tree as a memorial. He was hanged (crucified) on a tree called "The Old Rugged Cross." Although the actual wood of that tree disappeared long ago, the cross lives on in the hearts of those who follow him. It will be forever a memorial to Jesus and what he did in "cutting the covenant" for us. As long as there is a Christian on this earth, the cross, that memorial tree that Jesus planted, will live in his heart.

THE GIFTS

4. The gifts are health and wealth, in addition to salvation, and all the promises contained in the Abrahamic Covenant.

THE BLESSING

5. All the provisions and promises made to Abraham and his Seed Group are "the blessings."

THE FEAST

6. The feast was composed of the substitute blood and flesh of the sacrifice. In this case, the sacrifice was the blood and flesh of Christ himself, and the substitute for his flesh and blood is the bread and juice of the Lord's Supper. In Luke 22:19-20, we read, "And he took the bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new (KAINOS) testament (covenant - DIATHAKA) in my blood, which is shed for you." In 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, we read Paul’s version of the feast. “For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new (KAINOS) testament (covenant) in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come."

In Genesis 15, when God "cut the covenant" with Abraham, God provided sacrifices for the flesh and blood of the Blood Covenant. In Genesis 17, he required the blood of Abraham and his heirs via the token of circumcision. On the cross, the blood of Christ was given up. In the upper room, the bread and wine (The Lord's Supper) became the substitute feast, representing Jesus' blood and flesh. By partaking of that feast, his followers, symbolically partake of the life, nature, and resources of Christ himself. Remember Trumbull's words: "Counting himself in oneness of life with God, through the Covenant of Blood, man has sought for nourishment and growth through partaking of that food which in a sense was life, and which in a larger sense gave life, because it was the food of God, and because it was the food, which stood for God" (HCT p. 174). Concerning the Lord's Supper, Mr. Trumbull further says, "Here was the communion feast, in partaking of the flesh of the fitting and accepted sacrifice;—toward which all rite and symbol, and all heart yearning and inspired prophecy, had pointed, in all ages. Here was the realization of promise and hope and longing, in man's possibility of interunion with God through a common life—which is oneness of blood; and in man's inter-communion with God, through participation in the blessings of a common table. He who could speak for God here proffered of his own blood, to make those whom he loved of the same nature with his God; to bringhtem into blood-friendship with their God; and he proffered of his own body, to supply them with soul nourishment, in that Bread which came down from God. Then it was, while they were together in that upper room, for the consummating of that blood covenant of friendship...." (HCT pp. 281- 282).