Read for This Week’s Study: Jer. 31:31–34; Matt. 5:17– 28; Hos. 2:18–20; Isa. 56:6, 7; Heb. 8:7, 8; Heb. 10:4; Matt. 27:51.
Memory Text: “ ‘Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah’ ” (Jeremiah 31:31, RSV).
A cartoon in a magazine years ago showed a business executive in an office standing before other executives. He was holding a box of detergent in his hands, showing it to the other men and women. He proudly pointed to the word “New” that was displayed in large red letters on the box, the implication being, of course, that the product was new. The executive then said, “It’s the ‘New’ on the box that is new.” In other words, all that changed, all that was new, was simply the word New on the box. Everything else was the same.
In a sense, one could say that the new covenant is like that. The basis of the covenant, the basic hope that it has for us, its basic conditions, are the same as what was found in the old covenant. It has always been a covenant of God’s grace and mercy, a covenant based on a love that transcends human foibles and defeats.
The Week at a Glance: What parallels exist between the old and new covenants? What role does the law play in the covenant? With whom were the covenants made? What does the book of Hebrews mean by a “better covenant”? (See Heb. 8:6.) What relation is there between the covenant and the heavenly sanctuary?
* Study this week’s lesson to prepare for Sabbath, June 5.
Sunday May 30
“Behold, the Days Are Coming . . .”
Read Jeremiah 31:31–34 and answer the following questions:
1. Who instigates the covenant?
2. Whose law is being talked about here? What law is this?
3. Which verses stress the relational aspect that God wants with His people?
4. What act of God in behalf of His people forms the basis of that covenant relationship?
It is clear: the new covenant is not so different from the old covenant made with Israel on Mount Sinai. In fact, the problem with the Sinai covenant was not that it was old or outmoded. The problem, instead, was that it was broken (see Jer. 31:32).
The answers to the above questions, all found in those four verses, prove that many facets of the “old covenant” remain in the new one. The “new covenant” is, in a sense, a “renewed covenant.” It is the completion, or the fulfillment, of the first one.
Focus on the last part of Jeremiah 31:34, in which the Lord says that He will forgive their iniquity and the sin of His people. Even though the Lord says that He will write the law on our hearts and place it within us, He still stresses that He will forgive our sin and iniquity, which violates the law written in our hearts. Do you see any contradiction or tension between these ideas? If not, why not? What does it mean, as Romans 2:15 puts it, to have the law written within our hearts? (See Matt. 5:17–28.)
Looking at the verses for today, how could you use them to answer the argument that somehow the Ten Commandments (or, specifically, the Sabbath) are now made void under the new covenant? Is there anything at all in those texts that makes that point? On the contrary, how could one use those texts to prove the perpetuity of the law?
Monday May 31
Heart Work
At the time when the southern kingdom of Judah was about to end and the people were to be taken into Babylonian captivity, God announced through His prophet Jeremiah the “new covenant.” This is the first time this notion is expressed in the Bible. However, when the 10-tribe northern kingdom of Israel was about to be destroyed (some one hundred fifty years before the time of Jeremiah), the idea of another covenant was mentioned again, this time by Hosea (Hos. 2:18–20).
Read Hosea 2:18–20. Notice the parallel between what the Lord said there to His people and what He said in Jeremiah 31:31–34. What common imagery is used, and, again, what does it say about the basic meaning and nature of the covenant?
At moments in history when God’s plans for His covenant people were hampered by their rebellion and unbelief, He sent prophets to proclaim that the covenant history with His faithful had not come to an end. No matter how unfaithful the people might have been, no matter the apostasy, rebellion, and disobedience among them, the Lord still proclaims His willingness to enter into a covenant relationship with all who are willing to repent, to obey, and to claim His promises.
Look up the following texts. Though they do not specifically mention a new covenant, what elements are found in them that reflect the principles behind the new covenant?
Ezek. 11:19
Ezek. 18:31
Ezek. 36:26
The Lord will provide “ ‘a heart to know that I am the Lord’ ” (Jer. 24:7, RSV). He will “ ‘take the stony heart out of their flesh and give them a heart of flesh’ ” (Ezek. 11:19, RSV), and will give “ ‘a new heart’ ” and “ ‘a new spirit’ ” (Ezek. 36:26, RSV). He also says, “ ‘I will put My Spirit within you’ ” (Ezek. 36:27, NASB). This work of God is the foundation of the new covenant.
If someone came to you and said, “I want a new heart, I want the law written in my heart, I want a heart to know the Lord—but I don’t know how to get it,” what would you say to this person?
Tuesday June 1
Old and New Covenants
“ ‘And the foreigners who join themselves to the Lord, to minister to him, to love the name of the Lord, and to be his servants, every one who keeps the sabbath, and does not profane it, and holds fast my covenant—these I will bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer; their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples’ ” (Isa. 56:6, 7, RSV).
Jeremiah states that the new covenant is to be made with “ ‘the house of Israel’ ” (Jer. 31:33). Does this mean, then, that only the literal seed of Abraham, Jews by blood and birth, are to receive the covenant promises?
No! In fact, that was not even true in Old Testament times. That the Hebrew nation as a whole had been given the covenant promises is, of course, correct. Yet, it was not done to the exclusion of anyone else. On the contrary, all, Jew or Gentile, were invited to partake of the promises, but they had to agree to enter into that covenant. It is certainly no different today.
Read the above texts in Isaiah. What conditions do they place on those who want to serve the Lord? Is there really any difference in what God asked of them and what He asks of us today? Explain your answer.
Though the new covenant is called “better” (see Wednesday’s study), there really is no difference in the basic elements that make up both the old and new covenants. It is the same God who offers salvation the same way, by grace (Exod. 34:6, Rom. 3:24); it is the same God who seeks a people who by faith will claim His promises of forgiveness (Jer. 31:34, Heb. 8:12); it is the same God who seeks to write the law into the hearts of those who will follow Him in a faith relationship (Jer. 31:33, Heb. 8:10), whether they be Jew or Gentile.
In the New Testament, the Jews, responding to the election of grace, received Jesus Christ and His gospel. For a time they were the heart of the church, the “remnant, chosen by grace” (Rom. 11:5, RSV), in contrast to those who were “hardened” (Rom. 11:7, RSV). At the same time, the Gentiles, who formerly did not believe, accepted the gospel and were grafted into God’s true people, made up of believers, no matter the people or race to which they belonged (Rom. 11:13–24). So the Gentiles, “at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise” (Eph. 2:12, RSV), were brought near in the blood of Christ. Christ is mediating the “new covenant” (Heb. 9:15, RSV) for all believers, regardless of nationality or race.
Wednesday June 2
“A Better Covenant” (Heb. 8:6)
Yesterday we saw that regarding the basic elements, the old and new covenants were the same. The bottom line is salvation by faith in a God who will forgive our sins, not because of anything worthy in us but only because of His grace. As a result of this forgiveness, we enter into a relationship with Him in which we surrender to Him in faith and obedience.
Nevertheless, the book of Hebrews does call the new covenant “a better covenant.” How do we understand what that means? How is one covenant better than the other?
Where did the fault lie with the “failure” of the old covenant? (Heb. 8:7, 8).
The problem with the old covenant was not with the covenant itself but with the failure of the people to grasp it in faith (Heb. 4:2). The superiority of the new to the old lies in the fact that Jesus—instead of being revealed only through the animal sacrifices (as in the old covenant)—now appears in the reality of His death and high-priestly ministry. In other words, the salvation offered in the old covenant is the same offered in the new. In the new, however, a greater, more complete revelation of the God of the covenant and the love that He has for fallen humanity has been revealed. It is better in that everything that had been taught through symbols and types in the Old Testament has found its fulfillment in Jesus, whose sinless life, His death, and high-priestly ministry were symbolized by the earthly sanctuary service (Heb. 9:8–14).
Now, though, instead of symbols, types, and examples, we have Jesus Himself, not only as the slain Lamb who shed His blood for our sin (Heb. 9:12) but also as the One who stands as our High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary ministering on our behalf (Heb. 7:25). Though the salvation He offers is the same, this fuller revelation of Himself and the salvation found in Him, as revealed in the new covenant, make it superior to the old.
Read Hebrews 8:5 and Hebrews 10:1. What word does the author use to describe the old covenant sanctuary services? How does the use of that word help us to understand the superiority of the new covenant?
Think about this: Why would knowing about Christ’s life, death, and high-priestly ministry on our behalf give us a better understanding of God than one would get merely from the earthly sanctuary service ritual of animal sacrifices?
Thursday June 3
The New Covenant Priest
The book of Hebrews places a heavy emphasis on Jesus as our High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary. In fact, the clearest exposition of the new covenant found in the New Testament appears in the book of Hebrews with its emphasis on Christ as High Priest. This is no coincidence. Christ’s heavenly ministry is intricately tied to the promises of the new covenant.
The Old Testament sanctuary service was the means by which the old covenant truths were taught. It centered on sacrifice and mediation. Animals were slain, and their blood was mediated by the priests. These, of course, were all symbols of the salvation found only in Jesus. There was no salvation found in them in and of themselves.
Read Hebrews 10:4. Why is there no salvation found in the death of these animals? Why is the death of an animal not sufficient to bring salvation?
All these sacrifices and the priestly mediation that accompanied them met their fulfillment in Christ. Jesus became the Sacrifice upon which the blood of the new covenant is based. Christ’s blood ratified the new covenant, making the Sinaitic covenant and its sacrifices “old,” or void. The true sacrifice had been made, once and for all (Heb. 9:26). Once Christ died, there was no more need for any animals to be slain. The earthly sanctuary services had fulfilled their function.
Read Matthew 27:51, which tells how the veil in the earthly sanctuary was torn when Jesus died. How does that event help us to understand that the earthly sanctuary had been superseded?
Tied, of course, to these animal sacrifices was the priestly ministry, those Levites who offered and mediated the sacrifices in the earthly sanctuary on behalf of the people. Once the sacrifices ended, the need for their ministry ended, as well. Everything had been fulfilled in Jesus, who now ministers His own blood in the sanctuary in heaven (see Heb. 8:1–5). Hebrews stresses Christ as High Priest in heaven, having entered by shedding His own blood (Heb. 9:12), mediating on our behalf. This is the foundation of the hope and promise we have in the new covenant.
How does it make you feel, understanding that, even now, Jesus is ministering His blood in heaven on your behalf? How much confidence and assurance does that give you regarding salvation?
Friday June 4
Further Thought: “In partaking with His disciples of the bread and wine, Christ pledged Himself to them as their Redeemer. He committed to them the new covenant, by which all who receive Him become children of God, and joint heirs with Christ. By this covenant every blessing that heaven could bestow for this life and the life to come was theirs. This covenant deed was to be ratified with the blood of Christ. And the administration of the Sacrament was to keep before the disciples the infinite sacrifice made for each of them individually as a part of the great whole of fallen humanity.”—Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages, p. 659.
“The most striking feature of this covenant of peace is the exceeding richness of the pardoning mercy expressed to the sinner if he repents and turns from his sin. The Holy Spirit describes the gospel as salvation through the tender mercies of our God. ‘I will be merciful to their unrighteousness,’ the Lord declares of those who repent, ‘and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more’ (Heb. 8:12). Does God turn from justice in showing mercy to the sinner? No; God cannot dishonor His law by suffering it to be transgressed with impunity. Under the new covenant, perfect obedience is the condition of life. If the sinner repents and confesses his sins, he will find pardon. By Christ’s sacrifice in his behalf, forgiveness is secured for him. Christ has satisfied the demands of the law for every repentant, believing sinner.”—Ellen G. White, God’s Amazing Grace, p. 138.
Discussion Questions:
What is the advantage of having the law written in the heart rather than on tablets of stone alone? Which is easier to forget, the law written on stones or the law written in the heart?
Ever since the fall of humanity, salvation has been found only through Jesus, even if the revelation of that truth varied in different epochs of history. Do not the covenants work the same way?
Look at the second Ellen G. White quote in today’s study. What does she mean by “perfect obedience” as the requirement for a covenant relationship? Who is the only One who has rendered “perfect obedience”? How does that obedience answer the demands of the law for us?
Summary: The new covenant is a greater, more complete, and better revelation of the plan of redemption. We who partake of it partake of it by faith, a faith that will manifest itself in obedience to a law written in our hearts.
Story inside
A Church for Tourists
By Andrew McChesney, Adventist Mission
The new pastor was shocked when he showed up at the Bucharest International Seventh-day Adventist Church—the only English-speaking church in Romania’s capital—and found only three people present. All three were Romanians.
Three weeks later, Pastor Benjamin Stan learned that one of those three, a 21-year-old woman, was leaving. He wondered why God had led him to a dead church. “Why am I here?” he prayed. “Why did You give me this call?”
At that moment, two American tourists walked in the door. Benjamin realized that tourists need a place to worship. He kept praying.
A couple weeks later, he found a man dressed in a suit and tie waiting outside the church. The man lived with his family in Poland and worked in Romania. He belonged to another Christian church but, after studying the Bible, wanted a Sabbath-keeping church. Benjamin realized that there are foreigners who work in Romania but don’t speak Romanian. They need a place to worship.
After several months, Benjamin suggested holding Sabbath School and the divine worship service on Sabbath mornings. Until then, the church didn’t have a Sabbath School, and its hour-long worship service took place on Sabbath evenings. The two members opposed the proposal. They went to Romanian churches on Sabbath mornings and didn’t want to lose those friends. But Benjamin was insistent. “We do not come here to study English,” he said. “We come here to study the Bible. We need to be a church.”
Visiting other churches, Benjamin invited two teens and a man of about 30 to help organize the worship program. He advertised the new morning worship schedule on social media. That first Sabbath, 32 people showed up.
“You should have seen the expressions on the faces of the two members when they arrived,” Benjamin recalled. “Their eyes were big. They were surprised when they saw so many people, especially young people, in the church.”
The Polish man was baptized several weeks later.
Today, Benjamin has no doubt that the church, started by Pastor Adrian Bocaneanu in 2010, serves an important role in Bucharest. It has 26 members, and weekly attendance ranges from 30 to 50 people, including tourists, foreign workers, and international students.
What happened to those three people who attended the church on Benjamin’s first Sabbath? They are now very involved, including the young woman who left. She is now a church leader.
Connect with the Bucharest International Seventh-day Adventist Church at facebook.com/englishadventist.
teachers comments
Study Focus: Jeremiah 31:31, RSV
Part I: Overview
The original premise of the “covenant” has not changed through time. Each time the covenant has been offered, however, humanity, with its fallen, sinful nature, has broken the contract. But God has not given up on us. He still offers us salvation if we choose to accept it.
Part II: Commentary
Indeed, there was nothing wrong with the old covenant; it failed because ancient Israel had failed repeatedly to abide by its conditions. Unfortunately, a callous form of worship called ritualism barricaded Israel’s heart. The problem was always from the human end, not God’s. That’s how it always has been and still is now.
“Behold, the Days Are Coming . . .”
It was from this context that Jeremiah, the prophet of moaning, had been Spirit-led to lay the groundwork of the new covenant’s provisions and functionality. The divine law was to become etched in the cathedral of the heart. A new-covenant Priest would become inaugurated above, and He would function instead of the Levitical priesthood. The earthly sanctuary services would become swallowed up in the Messianic and redemptive activity of a better covenant.
Heart Work
Through the aegis of the new covenant, Christ, the Rock of Ages, desperately desired to remove Israel’s stony heart of lip-service religion: “I will give them one heart and put a new spirit in them; I will remove the heart of stone from their bodies and give them a heart of flesh, that they may follow My laws and faithfully observe My rules. Then they shall be My people and I will be their God.”—Harry M. Orlinsky, H. L. Ginsberg, Ephraim A. Speiser, eds., Tanakh, the Holy Scriptures. The New JPS Translation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1985), p. 906. (See Ezek. 11:19, 20.)
The Messiah had drawn a sharp contrast between mouth religion and heart religion. Could this be, perhaps, the reason that Christ chided a defiant ecclesiastical leadership bathed in callous formalism? “Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy concerning you, saying: ‘This people draws near to Me with their mouth, and with their lips honor Me; but their heart is far from Me. But in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the ordinances of men.’ And calling near the crowd, He said to them, Hear and understand.”—The Interlinear Hebrew-Greek-English Bible, vol. 4, p. 44; emphasis supplied. (See Matt. 15:7–10.)
Old and New Covenants
The Sinaitic covenant was not a covenant of works. In Exodus 5:22, 23, Moses’ question was posed in the form of a unique cosmic inquiry, which sought out the power, qualities, and character of Yahweh. God’s answer revealed the meaning of His name, rather than a title or designation (see Exod. 6:1–8). Yahweh’s name points to a relationship. To know the meaning of the Lord is to know what He can do for Israel. They had heard the name Yahweh, but they did not show faith in trusting what He could do for them as their God.
In Exodus, the covenant was based on two possible motivations. The first related to whether Israel, out of its own strength, would do what God had spoken. The second related to whether Israel would obey the covenant obligations by faith through the empowering grace mercifully provided by the supernal I AM.
Dispensationalism also limits the time of the covenant of grace. It divides Bible history into seven periods and teaches that God works differently in each of these periods. A dispensation is a period of time during which humankind is tested in respect to some specific revelation of God’s will. Each dispensation ends with divine judgment. Thus, there is dispensation of the law and a dispensation of grace among dispensations. Thus, those who hold tenaciously to this view vainly attempt to divide the biblical harmony between the law and the gospel.
A Better Covenant
“The new covenant functions better than the old covenant for God’s people. . . .
“In contrast with Israel’s old covenant, . . . Christ effects three basic promises of God: (1) He internalizes God’s moral law in the hearts of His people . . . ; (2) He individualizes the saving knowledge of God, so that each Israelite, without exception, has a personal, immediate relation with God (Hebrews 8:11); and (3) He forgives the sins of God’s people and “will remember their sins no more” (Hebrews 8:12). . . .
“According to Hebrews 8–12, the Church of Jesus represents the true fulfillment of Jeremiah’s predicted new covenant. Far from being an abrogation of Israel’s new covenant, it is rather a type and guarantee of the final consummation of the new covenant, when true Israelites of all ages will join the wedding supper of the Lamb in the New Jerusalem (Matthew 8:11, 12; 25:34; Revelation 19:9; 21:1–5).”—Hans K. LaRondelle, Israel in Prophecy: Principles of Prophetic Interpretation (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1983), pp. 114–121.
The New Covenant Priest
As Aaron dedicated himself to the priesthood, so Christ presented Himself to the Father. As Moses anointed Aaron, God anointed Christ (Lev. 8:30, Ps. 45:7).
“Still bearing humanity, [H]e ascended to heaven, triumphant and victorious. He has taken the blood of [H]is atonement into the holiest of all, sprinkled it upon the mercy-seat and [H]is own garments, and blessed the people.”—Ellen G. White, in The Youth’s Instructor, July 25, 1901.
When Jesus was inaugurated, the Father gave Him the title of High Priest, for Paul noted that He was “called of God an high priest” (Heb. 5:10; in Heb. 5:4, a word that indicates a “call” to the ministry), just as the president of an institution of higher learning addresses or calls the graduate “Doctor” on his graduation!
“His blood-marked ear listens to the voice of His Father, and responds to the cry of His forlorn sheep, Spirit quickened. His hand[s], bloodied by the nails, work for His Father’s kingdom, Spirit directed. His torn feet leave crimson footsteps so we can trace our way to glory, Spirit lighted.”—Leslie Hardinge, With Jesus in His Sanctuary: A Walk Through the Tabernacle Along His Way (Harrisburg, PA: American Cassette Ministries, Book Division, 1991), p. 343.
Part III: Life Application
For Reflection: However much ancient Israel, particularly at the time of Christ, lapsed into legalism, the religion given by Yahweh was never legalistic. From Eden onward, it was always presented as grace: God’s grace, offered to those who would accept it and the terms of it. By choosing to accept God’s grace, and surrendering to it, people entered into a covenant relationship with God.
1. Because of human tendency, Israel was continually breaking its relationship with God. So, how did the Cross reshape the old covenant to be a “better” covenant? What were the advantages of the new covenant over the old? Explain how there could be a danger of taking grace for granted under the new covenant.
2. Considering the tendency of people to break their end of the bargain continually, why do you think history shows God approaching humanity again and again in an attempt to enter into a covenant relationship with us? What does such persistence tell us about God’s love for us?
3. Why should we, today, with the knowledge of Christ, and of His sacrifice, be more faithful to God than were the people of old? That is, because we have the amazing revelation of God’s character as revealed in Jesus, which they didn’t have (at least as clearly as we have), why should we be even more faithful than they were? Discuss this idea in class.
4. Some people may ask, “How do you know that access to God depends not on achievement or obedience but simply on accepting God’s gift of grace and loving favor”? What examples could you use from your own life to answer their question? How important are our life stories in the actualization of the new covenant?
5. Why was it so hard for people to accept the new covenant when Jesus presented it originally? Is it easier or harder for people to accept it today? Explain.
Tukal Enpak: Thuciamlui leh thak kibatna bang omhiam? Thukham in thuciamna sungah koibang in mapang hiam? Kua tawh thuciamna kibawl hiam? Hebrew in “ahoihzaw thuciamna” a cihpen bang cihnopna hiam?(Heb. 8:6). Thuciamna leh vantung biakbuk kizopna bangpeuh omhiam?
SUNDAY May 30
ENUN, TUA NITE HONG TUNGDING HI . . .
Jeremiah 31:31–34 inla, anuai a dotnate dawngin:
1. Thuciamna kua in hanthawn hiam?
2. Kua ’ thukham kipu lak hiam? Bang thukham hiam?
3. Pasianin a mite tawh a kizop nopdan tang bangzahna in kipulak hiam?
4. Pasianin amite ading asepsak koipen in tua thuciam piankhiatna bulpi hiam?
Thuciamthak cihzongpen, Sinai mualah Israel tawh a ciam thuciamlui tawh kilamdang lua khollo hi. Sinai thuciamna pen luilua in model out zong hituanlo hi. Abuaina pipen tua thuciam ki palsatzo hi (Jeremiah 31:32).
Atung a dotna teng a dawnna pen tua tangliite mahin dawngpah a, “thuciamlui” muhdan tampi takmah thuciamthak sungah kihelkik hi. Thuciamthak cihpen a ki “puahthak thuciam” ahi hi. Amasa apen picinsakna, tangtunsakna ahi hi.
Jeremiah 31:34 atawpnalam bulphuh lecin, Topa in Ama’mite mawhna kamaisak ding hi cihi. Ama’ thukham eite lungtang sungah gelhding citei ahihhang, tua i lungtangtung a kigelh thukham palsatna mawhna hong maisak ding cileuleu hi. Hih tegel kikingkalhlua isa hiam? I sakkeileh, banghang? Rom. 2:15 in, amau lungtang sungah thukham omkhin a cihpen bang cihnopna ahi diam? (Matt. 5:17–28).
Tuni a laisiangtho simdingte nasim ciangin, thuciamthak sungah Thukhamsawm, a diakin Sabbath thukham kiphiatsiangta cih upnapen koibangin nahilhcian thei ding hiam? Tua munte ah hihbangthu a omtheihna ding thukhatpeuh omhiam? A omkhakleh, thukham in kiptawntung ahih nathu koibangin kihilhcian thei ding hiam?
MONDAY May 31
LUNGTANG NASEP
Khanglam gam abeikuan, Babylon ah a kisalmat madiakin Pasianin kamsang Jeremiah zangin “thuciamthak” pulak hi.Laisiangtho sungah agen masakpenna ahi hi. Saklamgam Israel namsawmte a kisiat dinglai (Jeremiah masang kum 150 laipek) in, thuciam dangkhatmah kipia a, tuapen Hosea tawh ahi hi (Hosea 2:18-20).
Hosea 2:18–20 simin. Jeremiah 31:31–34 sunga Topa’n amite kiang agen thute tawh saikak in. Akibatna bang hi a, thuciamna in a deihna bulpi leh omzia bang ci hiam?
Pasianin amite ading thuciamna ageel laitakin amau langdona leh uplohna hangun hun bei toto a, kamsangte sawlin Ama’tungah a thumaan mitetawh hih thuciamna in cikmahin khawllo ding cih gensak hi. Bangzahta in thumaanlo in lampial, langdo in thumanglo ahihuh hang, Topa’n amau lakah thuciamna tawh lutin thumangdingin kisikkik dingin Ama’ thuciamna tawh zollai hi.
Topa in “Keimahin Topa kahihlam athei lungtang” vaihawm ding hi (Jer. 24:7). Amah in, “amau suanglungtang lakkhiatsak in mihing lungtang kaguan ding hi” (Ezek. 11:19)a, “lungtang thak” leh “lungsimthak” kapia ding hi (Ezek. 36:26)cihi.”Note sungah Keima’kha kongguan ding hi” (Ezek. 36:27) zong cilai hi. Hihbangteng pen Pasianin, thuciamthak abul apatna ahi hi.
Mikhat peuh in, “Lungtangthak deih ing, ka lungtang sungah thukham gelhnuam ing, Topa athei lungtang deih ing, ngahdingdan zong thei tuanke’ng” a cileh, dawngdih ve.
TUESDAY June 1
THUCIAMLUI LEH THAK
“Ama’na asemding, Topa’min a itding, ama’nasem asuak dingin Topa pawlin gamdang mite, Sabbathni tangin asiasaklo ka thuciamna hoihtak alenkipmi peuhmah, —ka mual siangtho ah paipih in, Keima’thungetna innsungah ka lungdamsak ding a, amaute meihal biakna leh kabiaknatau tungah kasang ding hi; ka innpen mikhempeuh ading thungetna inn kici ding hi” (Isa. 56:6, 7).
Jeremiah in thuciamthak pen “Israel innkuantawh” bawlding cihi(Jer. 31:33). Hihthu in cilehsa Abraham’suan, Jew sisan a piangte bekmah in thuciamna kamciam sang ding cihna maw? Hilo e! Laisiangtholui hunlai in zong tuabang hituanlo hi. Hebrew minambup tungah thuciamna kamciam akipia himah hi. Mikhatpeuh helloh neituanlo hi. Jew leh Gentile khempeuh huamsak a, amau thukimna dungzui in tua thuciamna sungah luttheiuhhi. Tulaihun tawh kilamdang tuanlo hi.
Atung aIsaiah kammal simin. Topa’na a semnuamte ading bangthu omhiam? Tualai a Pasianin asawlte leh tulai a hongsawlte in kilamdanna anei hiam?
Wednesday sinna in thuciamthak pen “hoihzaw” cimah taleh, thuciamlui leh thuciamthak abawlna ah kilamdanna bangmah omtuanlo hi. Hotkhiatna pen hehpihna mahtawh hongpiapa tua Pasian mah hi a (Pai. 34:6; Rom. 3:24): Amite’ upna tungtawnin mawhmaina kamciam hongpia Pasian (Jer. 31:34, Heb. 8:12); Jew leh Gentile kuakua hileh, upna sungah Pasiantawh a kikhawl nuam a(Jer. 31:33, Heb. 8:10), Pasianin alungtang sungvuah thukham kagelhsak ding hi a ci Pa mah ahihi.
Laisiangthothak sungah, Jewte in, hehpihna tungtawn mahin Zeisu Khazih leh lungdamthu sanguh hi. (Rom. 11:7) sungah lungsim “khauh” acihte hiphialmah talehuh, tawlpikhat sungmah “abeibaang, hehpihna tawh ateel” (Rom. 11:5)mite ahi uhhi. Tua laitak mahin, thu-umlo icihcih Gentile mite in lungdamthu hongsanguh a, Pasian’mitaktak, minam deidan omlo (Rom. 11:13–24) thuum mite hongsuak uhhi. Gentile pen “tua hunlai in Khazih tawh nakikhen uh a, Pasian’teel Israel minamte hi loin, a pualam mite nahi uhhi. Pasian in amite tungah piakding a ciam thute zong angah ding nahikei uhhi” (Eph. 2:12) acihte pen Khazih’sisanin huai hi. Khazih in minam leh beh deidan omlo in “thuciamthak” (Heb. 9:15)hong khung hi.
WEDNESDAY June 2
“A HOIHZAW THUCIAMNA” (Heb. 8:6)
Zanni in thubulphuhte sungah thuciamlui leh thakin kilamdanna neikhollo cih mukhin hi hang. A tawphahpi penbel eite bangmah mannei ngeeilopi upna hangin hehpihna tawh Pasianin mawhna hong maisak in, hong honkhia cihthu ahi hi. Tua mawhmaisakna hangin, Ama sungah ki pumpiak in amahtawh kizopna upna leh thumanhna i neithei hi. Bangbang hitaleh, Hebrew laibu in “ahoihzaw thuciamna” a cihi.Bang acihnopna hi a, thuciam khatsangin a dangkhat koibangin hoihzaw thei ding hiam?
Thuciamlui in a guallelh theihna “thanemna” koiah omhiam?(Heb. 8:7, 8).
Thuciamlui in buaina nei hizawlo a, mihingte in upnatawh tua thuciam ana pomkhakloh manuh hizaw hi(Heb. 4:2).Alui in Zeisu siampilian nasepnate gansisan peuhtawh limlasak hi a, athakin Zeisu kibulphuhpah ahihmanin hoihzaw hibek hi. Thuciamlui in a pulak hotkhiatna pen a thak pulak mahtawh akibang ahi hi. Athak sungah bel, Pasian in mihing hong itna alianzaw leh apicingzaw in hong pulak hi. Laisiangtholui in agengen lim leh liimte khempeuh pen, mawhbanglo Zeisu’sihna, leibiakbukah siampiliante in a limpuak bangin asepna sungah picingsak ahihmanin athakin a hoihzaw limlim ahi hi(Heb. 9:8–14).
Tu’nbel alim, liim leh gentehnate khempeuh munah, Zeisu mahmah i nei a, eite’mawhna hangin a sisan hongbua a (Heb. 9:12, eite adingin siampilianpa zong ahihi(Heb. 7:25). Hotkhiatna a kibang veve ahihhang, Ama’ sung a hong pulakna picingzaw a, thuciamthakin thuciamlui sangin hoihzaw limlim hi.
Hebrew 8:5 leh Hebrew 10:1 simin. Laikungpu in thuciamlui biakbuk nasepnate a pulakna ah bang kammal zang hiam? Tua kammal azatmanin, thuciamthak a hoihzawkna koibangin i telzaw tuamthei hiam?
Hihthu ngaihsun in: Khazih’nuntakna, sihna, leh eite aiawhin siampilianpa asepnate theihcianna in, leitung biakbuk sung a sagawh biakpiakna lelte sangin, banghangin Pasian hong telzawsak thei hiam?
THURSDAY June 3
THUCIAMTHAK SIAMPIPA
Hebrew laibu in Zeisupen vanbiakbuk ah eite Siampilianpa ahihna kiptakin gen hi. Khazih in thuciamthak Siampilianpa ahihna pen laisiangthothak sungah Hebrew laibu ah kicianpen hi. A kituakpak khawng hihetlo hi.Khazih’vantung nasepna pen thuciamthak tawh akizopna thuthukpi ahihi.
Laisiangtholui biakbuk nasepnate in thuciamnalui thumaante hong hilh hi. Biakpiakna tawh hong palaisak hi. Ganhingte go a, a sisantawh siampite in palai hi. Hihte khempeuh pen Zeisu sungah hotkhiatna limte vive ahi hi. Amaute sungah hotkhiatna omtuanlo hi.
Hih biakpiaknate leh siampi palaina akizom hi a, Khazih sungah picing uhhi. Thuciamthak ah sisanin Zeisu hongpiak penmah hipah hi. Khazih’sisan in thuciamthak kipsak a, Sinai thuciam pen “lui” sakin beisak hi. Biakpiakna taktakpen khatvei leh atawntung adingin hongpia hi (Heb.9:26).Khazih khatvei si a, gangawh kul nawnlota hi. Leitung biakbuk nasep khempeuhin a nasep uh khinzota uhhi.
Matthew 27:51 simin. Zeisu sihlai in leitung biakbuk sung puandaal kikeekthu gelh hi. Leitung biakbuk nasepnate kilaihzo ahihna hihthu in koibangin hong telzawsak naci hiam?
Sagawh biakna leh siampi nasepna kizom a, Levi mite in mipite aiawh in, biakbukpi sungah sagawh biakna piaksak uh a, palai sepsak uhhi. Biakpiakna a zawhuh ciangin, a nasep azo hipeuh uhhi. Nakhempeuh Zeisu sungah apicin khit ciangin, tu in Ama’sisan ngiat tawh vanbiakbuk ah nahong sepsak gige hi (Heb. 8:1-5).Hebrew laibu in Zeisu vantungah Siampilian semcih genpha a, Ama’sisanngiat tawh eite palai hongsepsak(Heb. 9:12) cihi. Hihpen thuciamthak sungah eite’ lam-etna leh kamciamte thubulphuh ahi hi.
Zeisu in, Ama’sisantawh nang adingin vantungah nahongsepsak gige cih natheih ciangin nanuamna koibang ahi hiam? Tua in hotkhiatna tawh kisai lungmuanna leh khamuanna bangzah hong piazo ding hiam?
FRIDAY June 4
NGAIHSUTBEH DING: “Nungzuite tawh khomun leh lengtui adawnkhop laiun, Khazih in amau’honkhiapa ahih ding kamciam hi. Amah hangin Pasian’tate leh gamhluah ahihtheih na’ngun, thuciamthak pia hi. Hih thuciam hangin vantung thupha in leitung nuntaklai leh vantung nuntak zong amau a hiding hi. Hih thuciamna ah sepdingteng Khazih sisantawh kipicingsak hi. Tua banah neekkhop pawi zong, apuksa mihing peuhmah, amimalin kiheltheih dingin, nungzuite tungah Topa in pia hi.”—Ellen G. White, the Desire of Ages, p. 659.
“Hih kilemna thuciamna pen, mawhneimi akisik a, mawhna nusia peuhmah adingin, mawh maisakna’ng hehpihna kicinghi cihpenin lungsim hong sukha pen hi. Khasiangtho in zong Pasian’ hehpihna tungtawn hotkhiatna pen lungdamthu hi ci in hong hilh hi. Topa in “Amawhna akhialhna uhah amaute kahehpih ding a, tuabangin phawkin kanei nawnkei ding hi” (Heb. 8:12)cihi. Pasian in mawhneite a hehpihna tawh thumaan nusia hiam?Hi lo; Pasianin mawhneite gimsaklohna tawh a thukhamnuaisiah theilo hi. Thuciamthak sungah thumanna nuntakpih kul hi. Mawhnei in kisik in amawhna pulak leh, mawhmaina ngah ding hi. Khazih ama’ading aki piakhiatna hangin mawh maisakna angahthei hi. Mawhnei kisikkik khempeuh adingin thukham hongkalh khempeuh Khazih in hong lohsak khinzo hi”—Ellen G. White, God’s Amazing Grace, p. 138.
KIKUPDING DOTNATE:
1. Thukham i lungtang tungah hong kigelhsakna in bang hamphatna hongpia thei hiam? Suang tungah kigelh leh lungtangah kigelh, koipen mangngilhding baihzaw naci hiam?
2. Mi a pukpan kipanin hotkhiatna limlim Zeisu sungbekmah hi a, ahunzui in aki pulakkhiatna kibanglo hibek hi.Thuciamte zong tuamah bang ahi diam?
3. Tuni sinna sungah EGWhite kammal anihna enin. Thuciamna in a kalh “apicing thumanna” acihpen bang a cihnopna hiam? “Apicing thumanna” aneizopa khatbek pen kua hiam? Tua thumanna in thukham hongkalhte koibangin hong lohsak hiam?
THUKHUPNA: Thuciamthak in lianzaw, kicingzaw in ahoihzaw hotkhiatna ngiimna pulakna ahihi. Tua sungah a kihelmi peuhmah upna tawh kihel uhhi. Tua upna in lungtang tungah a kigelh thukham thumanna piangsak hi.
CH^WNGVAWN: “Ngâi teh, nî-te chu a lo thleng dawn tih hi LALPA thu chhuak a ni: chung nî-ahte chuan Israel chhungte leh Juda chhungte hnenah thuthlung thar ka siam ang”(Jeremia 31:31).
Chanchinbu-a lemziak (cartoon) pakhatah chuan sumdawng lian taka an hotupa hi sumdawng hotu ni ve tho dangte hmaa a ding lai tihlan a ni a. Chu pa chuan insukna sahbawn dip dahna bawm hi kengin a hmaa dingte chu a hmuhtir a. Chu bawm pang leh chung vela hawrawp lian taka inziak, Thar tih thumal chu chhuang deuh tak hian a han kawk a, chu thumal chuan a sahbawn dip ken chu a thar a ni tih a tilang. Mahse, heti hian a sawi ta a, “Bawm leh a chung vela ‘Thar’ tih inziak hi thil thar awm chhun chu a ni” tiin. A awmzia chu, thil thar awm chhun, thil an tihdanglam awm chhun chu sahbawm dip dahna bawm pang leh chung vela Thar tih thumal a chhu tel ve chauh kha a ni tihna a ni a. Thil dang zawng chu a ngai vek kha a la ni.
Hetiang deuh hi thuthlung thar pawh a ni e kan ti thei ang. Thuthlung innghahna, kan tana beiseina a siam leh chuta kan tih ve tur awmte chu thuthlung hlui, thuthlung hmasaa mi ang vek kha a la ni tho a. Thuthlung hi chu Pathian khawngaihna leh zahngaihna thuthlung a ni reng thîn hrim hrim a, mihringte tlin lohna leh chak lohna en kh<mtu hmangaihnaa innghat a ni.
Zirlâi Thlîr Lâwkna: Thuthlung hluiah/hmasaah leh thuthlung tharahte hian eng thil inangte nge awm? Danin thuthlunga pawimawhna a neih chu eng nge ni? Thuthlung hi tute tana siam nge? Hebrai Lehkhathawn ziaktu’n “thuthlung tha zawk” (Heb. 8:6) a tih hi eng nge ni? Thuthlung leh van biak buk hian eng nge inzawmna a neih?
SUNDAY May 30
NGÂI TEH, NÎ-TE CHU ALO THLENG DAWN E. . .
Jeremia 31:31–34 chhiar la, tichuan heng zawhnate hi chhang ang che:
1. Thuthlung siamtu tak hi tu nge ni?
2. Heta dan a sawi hi tu dan siam nge ni a? Eng dan nge?
3. Chang eng zatna hian nge Pathianin a mite nena inlaichînna tha tak neih a duh thu sawi?
4. A mite tana Pathian thil tih engin nge thuthlung inlaichînna nghahchhan siam?
Thil chiang tak chu: He thuthlung thar hi Sinai tlanga Israel fate nena a lo siam tawh thuthlung hlui/hmasazawk nen khan a danglamna a tam lo hle tih hi a ni. Dik taka sawi phei chuan, Sinai tlanga siam thuthlung kha thlak a ngaih chhan chu a hlui tawh hrim hrim vang emaw, a thin tawh em vang emaw ni lovin, bawhchhiat a nih vang zawk a ni (Jer. 31:32 en la).
A chunga zawhnate chhanna tur Jeremia 31:31–34- a a awm vek hian “thuthlung hlui/hmasa-a” thil tam tak kha thuthlung tharah pawh hian a la awm zui ve zel a ni tih a tilang. Chuvangin, “thuthlung thar” hi “thar thawh leh thuthlung” ti pawhin a sawi theih ang a. A hmasa zawk tihfamkimna emaw, hlen chhuahna emaw a ni.
Jeremia 31:34 tawp lam, LALPAN a mite bawhchhiatna leh an sualna a ngaihdam tur thu a sawina lai hi en teh. LALPA hian kan thinlungah a dan chu ziakin, keimahni chhungah dah tur thu sawi tho mah se, kan thinlunga ziak dante kan bawhchhiat avanga kan sualna leh bawhchhiatna chu a ngaihdam tur thu uar takin a sawi a. Thinlunga dan dah tih leh sualna ngaidam tih hi a inkalh em? A inkalh loh a nih chuan, eng vanga inkalh lo nge a nih? Kan thinlunga dan thiltih ziak a ni (Rome 2:15) tih awmzia hi eng nge ni (Mat. 5:17–28).
Vawiin zirlai innghahna Bible changte hi chhiar la, eng tin nge Thu Sawm Pekte (a bik takin Sabbath) hi thuthlung tharah chuan eng mah hlutna nei tawh lo nia sawitute chhan nan i hman theih ang? Heng Bible changahte hian chutiang lam hawi sawina thu chu a awm reng reng em? Eng tin nge heng thute hi Pathian dan la nun reng zia finfiahna atan kan hman theih ang?
THAWHTANNI May 31
THINLUNGIN HNA A THAWK
Chhim lam lalram Juda a tlukchhiat dawn hnaih, a ram mipuite pawh Babulon rama sal ni tura hruai thlak an nih lai vel khan Pathian chuan a chhiahhlawh Jeremia hmangin “thuthlung thar” a rawn puang a. Hei hi Bible-a he ngaih dan sawi chhuah a nihna hmasa ber a ni nghe nghe. Amaherawhchu, hmar lama awm hnam sawm, Israel lalram tia sawi mai thinte tihborala an awm dawn lai vel khan (hei hi Jeremia rawngbawl hma kum 150 vel a ni ang) thuthlung dang chungchang sawi lan a lo ni tawh a, a sawitu pawh Hosea a ni (Hos. 2:8–20).
Hosea 2:18–20 chhiar la. Heta LALPAN a mite hnena thu a sawi leh Jeremia 31:31–34-a a sawi hi khaikhin ang che. Kan mitthla theih tur eng tehkhin thu nge an hman ve ve a, chu chuan thuthlung nihna leh a bulthûm eng nge a sawi?
Pathianin a mite thu a thlunpui leh ruahmanna siamsakte chu an helna leh rin lohna ten a tibahlah fo mai a. Chutiang a thlen chang chuan a chhiahhlawhte tirin a mi rinawmte nena a lo siam thuthlung kha a la tawp lo a ni tih a puang thin. A mite chu eng ang pawhin lo rinawm lo tawh thin pawh ni se, an zingah kalsualna, helna leh thuawih lohna a punlun hle pawh a ni mai thei, chuti chungin LALPA chuan an sualte sim a, a thu zawm a, a thutiamte chan duhtu zawng zawngte nen chuan thuthlunga inlaichinna neih a duh a ni tih a la puang chhunzawm zel tho a ni.
A hnuaia Bible chang tarlante hi chhiar la. Thuthlung thar chungchang ngau ngau chu sawi lang chiah lo mah se, thuthlung thar nihphung tilangtu eng thil thilte nge awm tho si le?
Ezek. 11:19
Ezek. 18:31
Ezek. 36:26
LALPA chuan “amah chu LALPA a ni tih an hriat theih nân thinlung” a pe dawn a(Jer. 24:7). “An tisa ata thinlung sak chu a la bo vang a, a aiah thinlung nem a pe ang”(Ezek. 11:19). “Thinlung thar” a pe ang a, an chhungah “thlarau thar” a dah bawk dawn a ni (Ezek. 36:26). Tin, “In chhungah ka thlarau ka dah ang” tiin a sawi bawk a (Ezek. 36:27). He Pathian hnathawh hi thuthlung thar innghah chhan chu a ni.
Mi tu emaw i hnenah lo kalin, “Thinlung thar ka duh a, ka thinlunga dan ziah ka duh a, LALPA ka hriat theihna tur thinlung ka duh bawk—mahse, chu thinlung chu neih dan ka hre bawk si lo” tih thu sawi ta se la, chu mi hnenah chuan nge nge i sawi ang?
THAWHLEHNI June 1
THUTHLUNG HLUI LEH THAR
“Ram dang mite pawh, chawlhni bawhchhe lova serh thîn leh, ka thuthlung pawm tlat apiang, LALPA rawng bâwl tûr leh, LALPA hming ngaina tûr leh, a chhiahhlawhahte awm tûra LALPA zawm apiangte chu; anni ngei chu ka tlâng thianghlimah chuan ka hruai ang a, ka tawngtâina inah ka tihlim ang; hâlrala an thil hlante leh an inthâwinate chu ka mâichâmah chuan lawmin a awm ang: ka in chu mi tinrêng tân tawngtâina in an ti dâwn si a” (Isa. 56:6, 7).
Jeremia chuan thuthlung thar chu “Israel chhungte” nena siam a nih tur thu a sawi a (Jer. 31:33). Chuti a nih chuan tisaa Abrahama thlah, thisen leh pian leh murna lamah pawh Juda-te chauhin thuthlung thutiamte chu an chang thei dawn tihna a ni em?
Ni lo ve. Dik tak phei chuan, chutiang chu Thuthlung Hlui hun lai pawh khan a ni ngai chuang bik lo. Hebrai hnam pum pui hnenah khan thuthlung thutiamte chu pek a ni ngei mai tak a. Chutih rualin, anmahni ni lo mi dang zawng chhawk zawnga pek erawh a ni lo. Chuti ahnehin, he thutiamte hi chang turin mi zawng zawng— Juda pawh, Gentail pawh—sâwm vek an ni a. Mahse, chung mite chuan thuthlunga luh an remti ve tur a ni thung. Chutiang chu tun lai hunah pawh a la ni reng tho a ni.
A chunga Bible chang kan tar lan khi chhiar nawn leh la. LALPA rawngbawl duhtena an tih ngei ngei tur thil awmte chu eng nge ni? An laka Pathianin a phut leh keini tun lai huna mite laka a phut hi a danglam nge a thuhmun reng? I chhanna chu han sawi fiah deuh teh. Thuthlung thar hi thuthlung “tha zawk” tia sawi chu ni tho mah se (Nilaini zirlai en ang che), a nihna takah chuan thuthlung hlui, thuthlung hmasa nen khan a danglamna a awm hran lem lo. A thlungtu Pathian pawh khawngaihnaa chhandamna rawn thlentu (Exod. 34:6, Rom 3:24); a khawngaihna thutiamte rinnaa chan tumtu mihringte rawn zawngtu (Jer. 31:34, Heb. 8:12); Juda an ni emaw, Gentail an ni emaw, rinnaa amah zuitu apiangte thinlunga a dan ziaktu Pathian (Jer. 31:33, Heb. 8:10) tho kha a ni.
Thuthlung Thar lehkhabute hian khawngaihnaa thlan an nihna lo chhangtu Juda-te khan Isua Krista leh a chanchin tha chu an dawn thu an sawi hlawm a. Heng mite hi hun eng emaw ti chhung chu kohhran ban, “khawngaiha thlan, paih thlak bak” (Rome 11:5) niin, mi dang zawngte erawh chu an “chawlawl” zo ta a ni (Rome 11:7). Hetih lai hian, a hmaa ring ve lo Gentail-te pawh khan chanchin tha chu lo pawmin Pathian mi dik takte zingah chhiar tel an lo ni ve ta bawk a, eng hnam pawh niin eng chî pawh ni se, ringtu tia sawi an lo ni ta vek a ni (Rome 11:13–24). Chutichuan, “Krista laka tla hrang thin, Israel-ho khua leh tui nena inmihran, tiamna thuthlung laka mikhuala awm reng thinte” (Efesi 2:12, RSV) chu Krista thisen lamah hnuh hnaih an lo ni ta a. A chhan pawh Krista chuan ringtu zawng zawng tan, hnam leh chi pawh sawi lovin “thuthlung thar” (Heb. 9:15) a tak ram chantir tuma a beih vang a ni.
NILÂINI June 2
“THUTHLUNG THA ZÂWK” (Heb. 8:6)
Nimin zirlaiah khan a bulthum takah chuan thuthlung hlui leh thar te hi thuhmun reng a ni tih kan sawi tawh a. A pawimawh ber chu keimahnia hlutna eng emaw a awm vang ni lovin, a khawngaihna avang chauha kan sualte ngaidamtu tur Pathian kan rin avanga chhandamna chang thei kan ni hi a ni. He ngaihdamna kan chan avang hian amah nen inlaichinna kan lo nei ta a, amah chu ringa a thuawih turin kan lo intulut ta a ni.
Nimahsela, Hebrai Lehkhathawn chuan he thuthlung thar hi “thuthlung tha zawk” tiin a sawi tho bawk si. Hemi awmzia hi eng tiangin nge kan lo hriat thiam ve? Eng tiangin nge thuthlung thar hi a hmasa ai khan a that zawk le?
A khawi laiah hian nge thuthlung hlui/hmasa kha a “sawisel kai” a nih le? (Heb. 8:7, 8).
Thuthlung hlui/hmasa kha sawisel a kaina chhan chu a thuthlunga hrim hrim kha a tha lo ni lovin, a lo dawngtu tur miten rinnaa an dawnsawn loh vang a ni (Heb. 4:2). Thuthlung hlui/hmasa aia a thar a chungnun zawkna pawh Isua-ah a awm a—ran hmanga inthawina kal tlang chauha puan chhuah ni tawh lovin (thuthlung hlui/ hmasaah kha chuan hetiang hian tih a ni thin a)—tunah chuan ataka ama rawn thihna leh puithiam lalber a nihna anga a rawngbawlnaah a lo lang ta a ni. Tawngkam dangin sawi a ila, thuthlung hlui/hmasain a pek theih chhandamna kha thuthlung tharin a pek theih chhandamna nen hian thuhmun reng a ni kan ti thei ang. Amaherawhchu, thuthlung tharah hian thuthlungtu Pathian inpuanna ropui zawk leh famkim zawk chu kan hmu a, tin, suala tlu tawh mihringte a hmangaihzia pawh chiang leh zuala puan chhuah a ni bawk. Thuthlung tha zawk a nih chhan chu Thuthlung Hlui lehkhabuten chhinchhiahna leh entirna hmanga an lo sawi thin zawng zawng kha Isuaah a lo thlen famkim tak vek vang a ni a. Sual eng mah khawih lova a nun a hman tluanna, a thihna leh puithiam lalber nia rawng a bawlna hi biak buk rawngbawlnain a entir kha a ni (Heb. 9:8–14).
Tunah chuan chhinchhiahna, hlimthla leh entirna te aiah amah Isua kan lo nei ta a, ani chu kan sualte tlan nana a thisen chhuahtirtu Beramno talh tawh ni mai lovin (Heb. 9:12), kan aiawhin van biak bukah khian kan tan Puithiam Lalberah a han tang ta bawk a ni (Heb. 7:25). Min pek a tum chhandamna chu a thuhmun reng ni tho mah se, thuthlung thara puan chhuah ama chanchin leh amaha awm chhandamna chanchin sawina famkim zawk hian thuthlung hlui/hmasa aia chungnung zawkah a siam a ni.
Hebrai 8:5 leh Hebrai 10:1 chhiar la. A ziaktu hian thuthlung hlui/hmasaa biak buk rawngbawlna sawi fiah nan eng thumal nge a hman? Chu a thumal hman chuan eng tin nge thuthlung thar hi a hlui/hmasa aia chungnung zawk a ni tih hre thiam thei turin min pui le?
Hei hi ngaihtuah teh: Eng vangin nge Krista nun, a thihna leh kan aiawha puithiam lalber nia rawng a han bawlna hian lei biak buka ran hmanga an inthawinate ai khan Pathian chanchin hriat thiamna thuk zawk min pek le?
NINGANI June 3
THUTHLUNG THAR PUITHIAM
Hebrai Lehkhathawn hian van biak buka Isua kan Puithiam Lalber a han nihna hi a sawi uar hle mai a. Dik tak phei chuan, Thuthlung Thar lehkhabute zinga thuthlung thar chanchin sawi fiahna chiang ber chu Puithiam Lalber nia Krista sawinaHebrai Lehkhathawnah hian kan hmu a ni. Hei hi thil intawng fuh palh satliah ve mai a ni lo va. Van biak buka Krista rawngbawlna hi thuthlung thar thutiamte nen nghet takin a inzawm a ni.
Thuthlung Hlui hun laia biak buk rawngbawlna kha thuthlung hlui/hmasain thutak a paite inzirtirna hmanrua a ni a. Halral thilhlante leh indilsakna kha a rawngbawlna pui ber a ni bawk. Ran an talh a, tichuan a thisen chu puithiamten Pathian hnenah an hlan a. Mahse, heng zawng zawng hi Isuaah chauh hmuh theih chhandamna chhinchiahna vek a ni a. Anmahni ngau ngauah hi chuan chhandamna a awm lo.
Hebrai 10:4 chhiar la. Eng vangin nge heng rante thihnaah hian chhandamna chu hmuh theih a nih loh? Eng vangin nge rante thihna hi chhandamna thlentu atan a tawk zawh loh?
Heng halral thilhlan zawng zawng leh puthiamte inthawinate hian Kristaah a famkimna an hmu a. Isua chu thuthlung thar thisen innghahna halral thilhlanah a lo chang ta a ni. Krista thisen chuan thuthlung thar hi a rawn nemnghet a, chu chuan Sinai tlanga siam thuthlung leh halral thilthlante kha thil “hlui” leh hlutna nei tawh lovah a siam ta. Halral thilhlan tak tak chu tum khatah leh a tawp hlenna ni turin siam a ni ta a ni (Heb. 9:26). Krista chu a thih tawh avangin inthawina atan ran eng mah talh a tul tawh lo va. Lei biak buk rawngbawlnate khan an thawh tur an hlen chhuak vek tawh a ni.
Isua a thiha lei biak buk puan zar a lo thler tak thu inziahna Matthaia 27:51 chhiar la. Hemi tuma thil thleng hian eng tiangin nge lei biak buk kha luahlan a nih chhan hre thiam turin min puih le?
Heng ran hmanga inthawinate nena inzawm tlat chu puithiam rawngbawlna kha niin, Levia-hote khan mipuite aiawhin lei biak bukah halral thilhlan an hlan a, Pathian hnenah an inthawi bawk thin a nih kha. Mahse, halral thilhlan hmanga inthawina a lo tawp chiah khan puithiamte rawngbawlna pawh a awm zui zel a tul tak loh avangin a lo tawp zui ve ta nghal a. Thil eng kim kha tuna van biak buka ama thisen ngei hlantu Isuaah a lo famkim ta a ni (Heb. 8:1–5 en la). Hebrai Lehkhathawn hian vana Krista Puithiam Lalber a nih thu leh, ama thisen ngei kenga hmun thianghlima min dilpui tura a luh thu hi a sawi uar khawp mai a (Heb. 9:12). Hei hi thuthlung thara beiseina leh thutiam kan neih innghahna a ni.
Tunah hian Isua chuan in tan van biakbukah a thisen a hlan mek a nih tih i hriat avang khan eng tin nge i awm? Chumi chuan chhandamna chungchangah eng tianga nasain nge inrintawkna a pek che?
ZIRTÂWPNI June 4
ZIR BELHNA: “Khatia a zirtirte nena chhang an ei a, uain a in khan anmahni Tlantu a ni tih a tiamkamna a ni a. An hnenah thuthlung thar a pe a, chu thuthlung thar avang chuan amah pawmtute chu Pathian fate an lo ni a, Krista ro luahpuitute an lo ni ta bawk. He thuthlung avang vek hian he lei nun chhung leh nun lo awm tura vanin malsawmna tin a pek chu an ta a ni. He thuthlung hi Krista thisena nemngheh tur a ni a. Sakramen semna chu zirtirte hmaa mihring chhungkaw pumpui tlu tawha mi tin tana inhlanna famkim lo awm tur tarlanna a ni.”—Ellen G. White, Chatuan Nghahfak, p. 743.
“He remna thuthlunga a pawimawh lai ber chu inchhira a sualte hawisantu mi sual hnena ngaihdamna leh khawngaihna nasa taka lantir a ni hi a ni a. Thlarau Thianghlim chuan chanchin tha hi kan Pathianin min khawngaihna avanga min chhandamna hi a ni tih a sawi. LALPA chuan an sual simtute chu an fel lohnaahte zah a ngai dawn tih sawiin, an sualnate leh an khawlohnate pawh a hriat reng dawn tawh loh thu a sawi bawk (Heb. 8:12). Chuti a nih chuan Pathian hian mi sualte chunga khawngaihna lantir a duh avangin dikna a hlamchhiah ta mai tihna a ni em? Ni lo ve; Pathian chuan a dan hi hrem loha a bawhchhetu chhuahtirna hmanga tihzahawm loh a phal lo. Thuthlung thar hnuaiah chuan nung turin thuawihna famkim neih a ngai zawk a. Mi sualin a sualte puanga a sim bawk chuan ngaihdamna a chang ang. A tana Krista inhlanna avangin ngaihdamna chu a tan dah a ni a. Krista chuan an sualte sim a, amah rin chhantute tan danin a phut thilte chu a lo tlingtla vek tawh a ni.”—Ellen G. White, God’s Amazing Grace, p. 138.
SAWI HO TURTE:
1. Thinlunga ziak dan neih hi lungpheka ziak dan chauh neih aia a that zawkna eng nge awm? Lungpheka ziak dan hi nge theihnghilh awl zawka thinlunga ziak dan?
2. Suala mihringte a tluk atang reng khan chhandamna chu Isua kal tlang chauha chan theih a ni a. Chutih rualin, chu thutak puan chhuah a nih dan erawh chu hun hran hranah a danglam ve zel thung. Chutiang deuh chuan thuthlungte pawh hi a ni ve tho em?
3. Vawiin zirlaia Ellen G. White-i thuziak kan tar chhuah hnuhnung zawk kha en leh la, thuthlung inlaichînna a lo awm theih nan “thuawihna famkim” a awm a ngai a tih hi eng nge ni a awmzia ni ang? “Thuawihna famkim” neitu awm chhun chu tu nge ni? Eng tiangin nge chu a thuawihna chuan kan laka danin a phut thilte a tlingtlak tak le?
Khâikhâwmna: Thuthlung thar hi Tlanna ruahman puan chhuahna ropui zawk, famkim zawk leh tha zawk a ni a. Chumi changtute chuan rinnain kan chang a, chumi rinna chu kan thinlunga ziak dan zawmnah hmuh theihin a lo lang chhuak dawn a ni.
“‘Kyk, daar kom dae, spreek die HERE, dat Ek met die huis van Israel en die huis van Juda ‘n nuwe verbond sal sluit’ ” (Jeremia 31:31).
J are gelede het ‘n spotprentjie in ‘n tydskrif ‘n uitvoerende beampte wat voor ‘n ander groep beamptes in ‘n kantoor staan, uitgebeeld. Hy het ‘n kartonhouer vol waspoeier in sy hande gehou en dit aan die ander mans en vroue getoon. Baie trots het hy na die woord Nuut wat in groot rooi letters op die houer gedruk was, gewys, wat natuurlik geïmpliseer het dat die produk ook nuut was. Die beampte het toe gesê, “Dis die ‘Nuut’ op die houer wat nuut is.” Met ander woorde, al wat verander het, was net die woord Nuut op die houer. Verder was alles dieselfde. In ‘n sekere sin kan gesê word dat dit die geval met die nuwe verbond ook is. Die grondbeginsels van die verbond, die basiese hoop wat dit ons gee, die grondliggende voorwaardes daarvan, is dieselfde as die ou verbond s’n. Dit was nog altyd ‘n verbond van God se genade and goedertierenheid, ‘n verbond wat op liefde gegrond is wat die swakhede en neerlae van die mens verreweg oortref.
Hierdie week met een oogopslag: Watter ooreenkomste is daar tussen die ou en nuwe verbonde? Watter rol speel die wet in die verbond? Met wie was die verbond gesluit? Wat word in Hebreërs met die woorde “’n beter verbond” bedoel? (Hebreërs 8:6). Wat is die verwantskap tussen die verbond en die hemelse heiligdom? *Bestudeer hierdie week se les as voorbereiding vir Sabbat, 5 Junie.
Sondag 30 Mei
Kyk, daar kom dae . . .
Lees Jeremia 31:31–34 en beantwoord die volgende vrae:
1. Wie is dit wat die verbond aanspoor?
2. Van wie se wet word hier gepraat? Watter wet is dit?
3. Watter verse beklemtoon die verhoudingsaspek wat God met sy volk wil hê?
4. Watter handeling van God namens sy volk vorm die grondslag van daardie verbondsverhouding?
Dit is duidelik: Die nuwe verbond is nie iets wat baie van die ou verbond wat met Israel by Berg Sinai gesluit was, verskil nie. Dit is ‘n feit dat die probleem met die Sinai-verbond nie was dat dit oud of oudmodies was nie. Die probleem was liewer dat dit verbreek was (lees Jeremia 31:32). Die antwoorde op bogenoemde vrae wat in daardie vier verse gevind word, bewys dat baie fasette van die “ou verbond” dieselfde in die nuwe een bly. Die “nuwe verbond” is, in ‘n sekere sin, ‘n “verlengde verbond”. Dit is die voltooiing, of die vervulling van die eerste een.
Fokus op die laaste gedeel van Jeremia 31:34 waar die Here sê dat Hy die ongeregtigheid en sondes van sy volk sal vergewe. Selfs al sê die Here dat Hy sy wet op ons harte sal skryf en in ons binneste sal gee, beklemtoon Hy dat Hy ons sondes en ongeregtighede sal vergewe, wat natuurlik op die wet wat in ons harte geskryf is, inbreuk maak. Sien jy enige weersprekings of teenstellings in hierdie gedagtes? Indien nie, hoekom nie? Wat beteken dit om, soos Romeine 2:15 sê, die wet op ons harte geskrywe te hê? (Matthéüs 5:17–28).
Hoe kan vandag se verse gebruik word om die argument dat die Tien Gebooie op een of ander manier (of meer spesifiek, die Sabbat) onder die nuwe verbond tot niet verklaar is, te beantwoord? Is daar enigsins iets in daardie verse wat dit bevestig? Indien daar is, hoe kan daardie verse gebruik word om die bestendigheid van die wet te bewys?
Maandag 31 Mei
Om met die hart te werk
Toe die tyd van die suidelike koninkryk van Juda se einde aangebreek het en die volk na Babel weggevoer was, het God deur sy profeet Jeremia die “nuwe verbond” aangekondig. Dit is die eerste keer wat hierdie gedagte in die Bybel genoem word. Maar, toe die tien stamme van die noordelike koninkryk van Israel se tyd van verstrooiing aangebreek het (so honderd-en-vyftig jaar voor Jeremia se tyd), het Hoséa ook die gedagte van ‘n ander verbond genoem (Hoséa 2:18–20).
Lees Hoséa 2:18–20. Let op na die ooreenkoms tussen wat die Here hier aan sy volk sê teenoor wat Hy in Jeremia 31:31-34 sê. Watter gemeenskaplike beeldspraak word gebruik, en, weereens, wat sê dit oor die grondliggende betekenis en aard van die verbond?
Gedurende die oomblikke in die geskiedenis toe God se planne vir sy verbondsvolk gekniehalter was deur hulle opstand en ongeloof, het Hy profete gestuur om aan te kondig dat die verbondsgeskiedenis van sy getroues nie tot ‘n einde gekom het nie. Dit het nie saak gemaak hoe ontrou die volk was nie, ongeag die afvalligheid, opstand, en ongehoorsaamheid onder hulle, die Here het nogtans sy gewilligheid bekendgemaak om ‘n verbondsverhouding met almal wat gewillig was om hulle te bekeer, te gehoorsaam, en sy beloftes toe te eien, te sluit.
Slaan die volgende verse na. Alhoewel hulle nie spesifiek ‘n nuwe verbond noem nie, watter elemente word in hulle gevind wat die beginsels in die nuwe verbond weerspieël?
Eségiël 11:19
Eségiël 18:31
Eségiël 36:26
Die Here sê: “ ‘Ek sal hulle ‘n hart gee om My te ken, dat Ek die HERE is’ ” (Jeremia 24:7). Hy sal “ ‘die hart van klip uit hulle vlees verwyder en hulle ‘n hart van vlees gee’ ” (Eségiël 11:19), en Ek sal julle “ ‘’n nuwe hart’ ” en “ ‘’n nuwe gees’ ” gee (Eségiël 36:26). Hy sê ook, “ ‘Ek sal my Gees in jul binneste gee’ ” (Eségiël 36:27). Hierdie werk van God is die fondament van die nuwe verbond.
As iemand na jou toe sou kom en sê, “Ek wil ‘n nuwe hart hê, Ek wil die wet in my hart geskrywe hê, Ek wil ‘n hart hê wat die Here ken — maar ek weet nie hoe om dit te kry nie,” wat sou jy vir daardie persoon sê?
Dinsdag 1 Junie
Die ou en nuwe verbonde
“ ‘En die uitlanders wat hulle by die HERE aangesluit het, om Hom te dien en om die Naam van die HERE lief te hê deur sy knegte te wees – elkeen wat die sabbat hou, sodat hy dit nie ontheilig nie, en hulle wat vashou aan my verbond, hulle sal Ek bring na my heilige berg, en Ek sal hulle vreugde laat smaak in my huis van gebed; hulle brandoffers en hulle slagoffers sal welgevallig wees op my altaar; want my huis sal ‘n huis van gebed genoem word vir al die volke’ ” (Jesaja 56:6, 7).
Jeremia verklaar dat die nuwe verbond met die “ ‘huis van Israel’ ” gesluit sal word (Jeremia 31:33). Beteken dit dan dat net die letterlike saad van Abraham, Jode deur geboorte, die verbondsbeloftes sal ontvang? Nee! Om die waarheid te sê, dit was selfs nie waar in Ou Testamentiese tye nie. Dat die verbondsbeloftes aan die Hebreeuse nasie in geheel gegee was, is natuurlik so. Maar, dit was nie gedoen om ander uit te sluit nie. Inteendeel, Jood en heiden, was genooi om aan die beloftes deel te hê, maar hulle moes instem om die verbond te aanvaar. Dit is geensins anders vandag nie.
Lees die teksverse in Jesaja wat hierbo aangehaal word. Watter voorwaardes moet hulle wat die Here wil dien, nakom? Is daar werklik enige verskil in wat God hulle gevra het en wat Hy ons vandag vra? Verduidelik jou antwoord.
Hoewel die nuwe verbond ‘n “beter” verbond genoem word (Woensdag se studie), is daar werklik geen verskil in die basiese beginsels van beide die ou en die nuwe verbond nie. Dit is dieselfde God wat dieselfde verlossing deur genade aanbied (Exodus 34:6, Romeine 3:24); dit is dieselfde God wat ‘n volk soek wat deur geloof sy beloftes van vergifnis vir hulleself sal toe-eien (Jeremia 31:34, Hebreërs 8:12); dit is dieselfde God wat verlang om sy wet in die harte van Jood of heiden wat met Hom ‘n geloofsverhouding wil aangaan, te skryf (Jeremia 31:33, Hebreërs 8:10). In die Nuwe Testament het die Jode wat op die “verkiesing van die genade” gereageer het, Jesus Christus en sy evangelie aanvaar. Vir ‘n tydlank was hulle die hart van die kerk, die “oorblyfsel, ooreenkomstig die verkiesing van die genade” (Romeine 11:5) in teenstelling met hulle wat “verhard” was (Romeine 11:7). Terselfdertyd het die heidene wat vroeër nie geglo het nie die evangelie aanvaar, en was toe in God se ware volk wat uit mense van alle rasse bestaan het, ingeënt (Romeine 11:13–24). Die heidene wat “sonder Christus was, vervreemd van die burgerskap van Israel en vreemdelinge ten aansien van die verbonde van die belofte”, (Efésiërs 2:12) het dus deur die bloed van Christus “naby gekom”. Christus is die Middelaar van die “nuwe verbond” (Hebreërs 9:15) vir alle gelowiges ongeag nasionaliteit of ras.
Woensdag 2 Junie
“’n Beter verbond” (Hebreërs 8:6)
Ons het gister gesien dat wat die grondliggende beginsels betref, die ou en nuwe verbonde dieselfde was. Die hoofsaak is verlossing deur geloof in ‘n God wat ons sondes vergewe, nie omdat ons dit werd is nie, maar deur Sy genade alleen. As gevolg van hierdie vergifnis begin ons ‘n verhouding met Hom deur alles oor te gee en in Hom te glo, en Hom te gehoorsaam. Tog noem die boek van Hebreërs die nuwe verbond ‘n “beter verbond.” Hoe verstaan ons dit? Hoe is een verbond dan beter as die ander een?
Wat was dan “fout” met die ou verbond? (Hebreërs 8:7, 8).
Die ou verbond se probleem was nie die verbond self nie, maar die mense se tekortkominge om dit met die geloof te verenig (Hebreërs 4:2). Die superioriteit van die nuwe bo die oue word in Jesus gevind — in plaas van net deur diere-offers (soos in die ou verbond) — deur die werklikheid van sy dood en hoëpriesterlike bediening. Met ander woorde, die verlossing wat in die ou verbond aangebied word, is dieselfde as dié van die nuwe verbond. In die nuwe was daar egter ‘n groter, meer volledige openbaring van die God van die verbond en sy liefde vir die gevalle mensdom, geopenbaar. Dit is beter omdat alles wat deur middel van simbole en tipes in die Ou Testament geleer was in Jesus vervul was, en wie se sondelose lewe, Sy dood, en hoëpriesterlike bediening deur die aardse heiligdomsdiens gesimboliseer was (Hebreërs 9:8–14). In plaas van simbole, tipes en voorbeelde het ons nou Jesus self, nie net as die geslagte Lam wat sy bloed vir ons sondes gestort het nie (Hebreërs 9:12), maar wat as ons Hoëpriester in die hemel diens doen om vir ons in te tree (Hebreërs 7:25). Hoewel die verlossing wat Hy aanbied dieselfde is, is hierdie vollediger openbaring van Homself en die verlossing wat in Hom gevind kan word soos in die nuwe verbond geopenbaar word, beter as die oue.
Lees Hebreërs 8:5 en Hebreërs 10:1. Watter woord word deur die outeur gebruik om die ou verbond se heiligdomdiens te beskryf? Hoe help die gebruik van daardie woord ons om die superioriteit van die nuwe verbond te verstaan?
Dink hieroor na: Hoekom sal meer kennis oor Christus se lewe, sy dood en hoëpriesterlike bediening vir ons, aan ons ‘n beter begrip van God gee as wat ons uit die aardse heiligdomdiens se rituele van diere-offers kan leer?
Donderdag 3 Junie
Die Priester van die nuwe verbond
Die boek van Hebreërs lê baie klem op Jesus se werk as ons Hoëpriester in die hemel. Dit is ‘n feit dat die duidelikste verklaring van die nuwe verbond in die Nuwe Testament in die boek van Hebreërs gevind word waar daar groot klem op Christus as ons Hoëpriester gelê word. Dit is nie toevallig nie. Christus se hemelse bediening word oorvloedig met die beloftes van die nuwe verbond vermeng. Die Ou Testamentiese heiligdomdiens was gebruik om die waarhede van die ou verbond te verkondig of te leer. Die fokus was op offerandes en middelaarskap. Diere was geslag en hulle bloed was as bemiddeling deur die priesters gebruik. Hierdie was natuurlik alles simbole van die verlossing wat net in Jesus gevind kan word. Daar was geen redding in en deur hulle te vinde nie.
Lees Hebreërs 10:4. Hoekom is daar geen verlossing in die dood van hierdie diere te vinde nie? Hoekom is die dood van ‘n dier nie genoegsaam om verlossing te bewerkstellig nie?
Al hierdie offerandes en die priesterlike middelaarskap wat daarmee saamgegaan het, was in Christus vervul. Jesus het die Offer waarop die bloed van die nuwe verbond gebaseer is, geword. Christus se bloed het die nuwe verbond bekragtig en die Sinaitiese verbond “oud” of nietig verklaar. Die ware Offer was eens en vir altyd gebring (Hebreërs 9:26). Toe Christus gesterf het, was daar geen behoefte vir enige diere om weer geslag te word nie. Die aardse heiligdomdienste het hulle doel bereik.
Lees Matthéüs 27:51 wat vertel hoe die voorhangsel in die aardse heiligdom geskeur het toe Jesus gesterf het. Hoe help daardie gebeurtenis ons om te verstaan hoekom die aardse heiligdom vervang of afgeskaf was?
Die diere-offers was natuurlik met die priesterlike bediening, en die Leviete wat die offerwerk gedoen en vir die mense met die offerandes in die aardse heiligdom ingetree het, vervang. Toe die offer van diere opgehou het, het die behoefte vir hulle bediening ook tot ‘n einde gekom. Alles was in Jesus vervul wat nou met sy eie bloed in die hemelse heiligdom vir ons intree (lees Hebreërs 8:1–5). Hebreërs bekragtig Christus as Hoëpriester in die hemel, Hy wat deur sy eie bloed in die hemel ingegaan het (Hebreërs 9:12), en nou vir ons intree. Dit is die fondament van die hoop en belofte wat ons in die nuwe verbond het.
Hoe laat dit jou voel deur te weet dat Jesus deur Sy eie bloed nou in die hemel namens jou diens doen? Hoeveel vertroue en sekerheid met betrekking tot verlossing gee dit aan jou?
Vrydag 4 Junie
Vir verdere studie:
“Deur saam met Sy dissipels brood en wyn te neem, het Christus Hom verbind om hul Verlosser te wees. Hy het die nuwe verbond aan hulle opgedra waardeur almal wat Hom ontvang, kinders van God word en mede-erfgename van Christus. Deur hierdie verbond was elke seën wat die hemel in hierdie en die toekomstige lewe kan uitstort, hulle s’n. Hierdie verbondsakte sou deur die bloed van Christus bekragtig word. En die hou van die sakrament sou hulle herinner aan die perkelose opoffering wat vir elkeen van hulle individueel gemaak is as deel van die gevalle mensdom se groot gebod.” — Ellen G. White, Die Koning van die Eeue, bl. 659. “Die mees treffende kenmerk van hierdie verbond van vrede is die buitengewone oorvloed van vergifnis en genade wat aan die sondaar voorgehou word wanneer hy berou kry en sy sonde versaak. Deur die Heilige Gees word die evangelie as verlossing deur God se tere barmhartighede aangebied. ‘Ek sal barmhartig wees oor hulle ongeregtighede,’ sê die Here aan diegene wat berou het oor hulle sonde, ‘en aan hulle sondes en hulle oortredinge nooit meer dink nie’ (Hebreërs 8:12). Skuif God sy geregtigheid opsy wanneer Hy genade aan die sondaar betoon? Nee; God kan nie sy wet ignoreer deur toe te laat dat dit oortree word en die oortreding dan ongestraf laat bly nie. Onder die nuwe verbond is volmaakte gehoorsaamheid die voorwaarde vir die ewige lewe. Wanneer die sondaar berou kry en sy sonde bely, sal hy vergifnis ontvang. Deurdat Christus namens ons gesterf het, word vergifnis vir die sondaar gewaarborg. Christus het die vereistes van die wet vir elke berouvolle sondaar wat glo, nagekom.” — Ellen G. White, God’s Amazing Grace, bl. 138, (vry vertaal).
Vrae vir bespreking:
1. Wat is meer voordelig, om die wet in die hart of op kliptafels geskrewe te hê? Wat is makliker om te vergeet, die wet op kliptafels of die wet wat in die hart geskryf is?
2. Van die begin van die mens se sondeval af was verlossing deur Jesus alleen die enigste uitweg, selfs al het die openbaring van daardie waarheid gedurende die verskillende tydperke (epogge) van die geskiedenis verskil. Is dit nie ook die geval met die verbonde nie?
3. Lees die tweede Ellen G. White aanhaling in vandag se studie. Wat beteken dit as sy praat van “volmaakte gehoorsaamheid” as vereiste vir ‘n verbondsverhouding? Wie is die enigste Een wat “volmaakte gehoorsaamheid” voorsien het? Hoe voldoen daardie gehoorsaamheid namens ons aan die vereistes van die wet?
Opsomming: Die nuwe verbond is ‘n groter, meer volledige en beter openbaring van die Plan van Verlossing. Ons wat deel daarvan word, doen dit deur geloof, ‘n geloof wat in gehoorsaamheid aan die wet wat op ons harte geskryf is, geopenbaar word.
