How is the new covenant fulfilled? (Jer 31:31-40)

When we read Old Testament prophecies that relate to the future, we sometimes wonder how these are fulfilled. We understand that prophecies may have more than one fulfilment, but our application of this principle can be quite haphazard as we pick and choose elements arbitrarily that strike us as relevant or not. For instance, we quickly apply Isaiah 9:6 (‘a son will be born to us…’) to Jesus Christ, but if we are careful readers, we may wonder how such a distant promise about Messiah’s coming 700 years after Isaiah would have been helpful for those threatened with conquest by the Assyrian forces. To put this into context, imagine that in 1217, at the time of the fifth crusade that attempted to regain the Holy Land for Christians, a prophecy foretells the promise of a homeland for Jews in Palestine in 1917 (Balfour declaration). The time difference is so enormous and the historic circumstances so different that it is hard to see how such a prophecy would have relevance in the thirteenth century.

Three horizons in the prophets

Chris Wright helpfully suggests a more ordered way of engaging with prophecies and points out that there are at least three possible horizons for interpretation: the context of those who first received the prophecy (Horizon 1), the NT context (Horizon 2) and the time of the new creation still in the future (Horizon 3).[1] Not all prophecies have all three horizons, but as much as we can establish, it is helpful not to skip Horizon 1 and to ask, ‘How did this prophecy make sense to those who first heard it? How did it challenge or comfort them or answer their struggles?’ Most prophecies fit neatly into this category, but sometimes we find that the claims made are so great that it is impossible to limit them to their original context and we look to the changes that Jesus’ life, death and resurrection brought to account for the prophecy’s perspective (Horizon 2). Occasionally, even the transformation of understanding that comes with Jesus Christ cannot fully explain the reality described and we expect ultimate fulfilment in the future (Horizon 3).

A changed heart and its limitations (Horizon 1)

Jeremiah’s new covenant prophecy (Jer 31:31-34) is one where we are forced to conclude that all three horizons are present. For the Jews in Babylonian exile, in despair and wondering if there was any hope for their future, God’s answer is that only He Himself can heal their wayward heart and enable their obedience, but the good news is that He wants to do it! On one level, real heart change happens when, like the exiles, we come face-to-face with our sins and see the terrible consequences that follow from them and then experience God’s forgiveness and the wiping of the slate clean. It is that encounter with grace and God’s love when we know ourselves of being so undeserving of it that opens our heart to a new way of living. In the case of the Jews, their return from exile shows that something did fundamentally change for them, and they recommit themselves in a covenant ceremony (Neh 9:38; 10:1-39).[2] God through their experiences transforms their heart. Although they do not become sinless, the blatant and mindless idolatry of their forefathers is a thing of the past. One only needs to read the prayers of Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezra 9:5-15; Neh 9:5-37) from the post-exilic period to sense their recognition of how hopeless their spiritual state and surprising God’s grace and forgiveness are.

At the same time, the heart is wretchedly corrupt and programmed to seek its own salvation since the Fall, so that the Law, the very thing that was meant to help God’s people to live holy lives will become a means of pride and a matter of accomplishment. By the time of Jesus, this obsession to keep the Law (and avoid the situation that led to the exile) will create the same problem for Jews that they had before the exile, albeit in different garb. Doing what we want to do and looking for fulfilment outside of God as Judah had done before the exile is one way of seeking ‘salvation’. Another is to do God’s will, discipline our lives and conquer bad habits so that God would be obliged to bless us. The two attitudes are branches of the same tree that feed on the same soil.

New covenant on Horizons 2-3

As Christians (Horizon 2), grafted into the community of God’s people Israel, we recognise that Jesus’ death and resurrection is a watershed in our relationship with God and Jesus Himself states that His death is the inauguration of the new covenant through His blood (Luke 22:20). God not only forgives our sin but breaks its power through the cross. We are indwelt by the Holy Spirit, so we are enabled to live godly lives and have the potential to be free from the slavery of sin (Gal 4:4-7; Rom 6:8-19). Because of the cross we know God’s love more fully. Nevertheless, we cannot say that there is no more need for teaching (Jer 31:34) or that our hearts are so entirely transformed that our old programming is no longer operative. Thus, we look to the future (Horizon 3) for the ultimate fulfilment of this promise when sin will no longer have a place in the human heart.

God will never reject His people (and city) – Horizon 1

Finally, God affirms that He will never annihilate or reject Israel as a people and that Jerusalem will never again be destroyed (Jer 31:36-37, 40). On Horizon 1, this is God’s firm commitment to His people and the city where He is worshipped. Indeed, the post-exilic Books of Ezra and Nehemiah describe the rebuilding of the temple and the city, the struggles of the post-exilic community, as well as God’s grace and power in overcoming obstacles in the restoration work. For over 500 years after the city is rebuilt, it will stand as a testimony to God’s faithfulness.

Watershed and the remnant – Horizon 2

It becomes harder to read this passage on Horizon 2 because Jewish attitudes to Jesus are a watershed in God’s dealings with His people. Israel’s story with God is brutally interrupted as a result and the temple and the city of Jerusalem is destroyed by the Romans in AD 70 as a visible expression of judgment. Here, we must remember a particular aspect of prophecy, namely that it seeks a human response. Judgment may not happen if people repent and God may decide not to bless if people are arrogant against him (see Jer 18:1-12), so that prophecy is not entirely set in stone. Those Jews who rejected Jesus in the first century ultimately rejected God’s offer of salvation and God Himself, so in one sense they excluded themselves from the people of God. The rupture in the relationship is well expressed in the fall of the city.

Nevertheless, the language appealing to the created order and the emphasis on God’s permanent commitment (literally ‘all the days’ in Jer 31:36 and ‘forever’ meaning permanently in Jer 31:40) indicates that even if the cataclysmic failure of Israel as a people to recognise their Saviour interrupted the promises, this cannot be the end. God has not ultimately rejected His people. As the Apostle Paul argues (see his extended discussion in Romans 9-11), in every age God kept a remnant (Rom 11:1-6). Indeed in NT times, there were those Jews who believed in Jesus and continued on as God’s people. Gentiles are grafted into the olive tree that is God’s people alongside believing Jews and the possibility remains for the natural branches (Jews) who were broken off to be grafted in again, if they do not continue in unbelief (Rom 11:17-24).

People and city on Horizon 3

Moreover, Paul points to Horizon 3 still in the future and holds out hope that this is not the end of the story for Israel.[3] He discusses ethnic Israel’s partial hardening that allows the fullness of the Gentiles to enter into relationship with God and then argues that ethnic Israel will be saved (Rom 11:25-26; God will remove their ungodliness, i.e. their hardening? [Isa 59:20] and take away their sins [Jer 31:33]). Paul’s clinching argument is that God’s calling for ethnic Israel is irrevocable (Rom 11:28-29). Finally, the prophecy about Jerusalem may point beyond its post-exilic restoration to a time when it will truly be holy and consecrated to God (Jer 31:40) when it will not be overthrown ever again (Rev 21:1-27). While we cannot know or fully understand the details of how this will work itself out in the future, we trust God’s faithfulness.

---

[1] Christopher J.H. Wright, The Message of Jeremiah, BST (Nottingham: IVP, 2014), 334-39.

[2] Although many of their specific commitments read like legalism for us because of what we know from the gospels about later developments, it is not meant as such. Rather, post-exilic Jews recognised that they had particular tension points where their commitment was lacking (intermarriage, Sabbath and neglect of the Temple). All these affected the relationship with God. Intermarriage with non-Jews meant that the worship of other gods became a greater temptation and doing the mundane tasks of earning a living on the Sabbath meant that there was no time for God and His worship. Further, not bringing contributions to the Temple (tithes, offerings, etc.) meant that the temple personnel had nothing to live on (their pay for their service was through a portion of the tithes and offerings) and had to go off to work elsewhere. Moreover, without the gifts of the people, the daily prescribed offerings for the community (for sin, etc.) could not be fulfilled which would ultimately hinder the people’s relationship with God.

[3] Interpreters are divided on how to read Romans 11, where this is discussed. Some argue that Israel has now been re-interpreted as those Jews and Gentiles who believed (note also Romans 9:6-13 stating that not all born of Israel are Israel), so that the ‘all Israel’ who are saved in Rom 11:25-27 are all the Jews and Gentiles who believe in Jesus Christ. However, Paul’s reference to Israel throughout Romans 11 is clearly to ethnic Israel as opposed to Gentiles who believed (Rom 11:7, 11-16, 25). Further, Paul describes the events to come as a mystery that undercuts Gentile superiority (thinking themselves wise; note also Rom 11:18). This suggests that there is more to these future events than an ongoing process of believing Jews and Gentiles becoming incorporated into God’s family until ‘all Israel’ (Gentiles and Jews) are saved. Eliminating Gentile pride in a surprise move fits better the context of ethnic Israel being saved when the partial hardening is taken away. The OT references that Paul quotes (see in the main text of this post) and the statement about God’s calling being irrevocable further support the conclusion that it is ethnic Israel who will be brought back into relationship with God.

If you enjoyed this post, please share it with others.