©2011-2026, David E. Robinson: At the Gates of Yerushalayim Ministries
Lessons from the Wilderness, Volume 74
Covenant Reality and Apostolic Leadership, Part Two
Answers to the Questions Yet Asked:
What Got Us Here [i] [ii] [iii] [iv]
2 Corinthians 3:1-4 [ESV]
3 qAre we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, ras some do, sletters of recommendation to you, or from you? 2 tYou yourselves are our letter of recommendation, written on our1 hearts, to be known and read by all. 3 And you show that you are a letter from Christ delivered by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of uthe living God, not on vtablets of stone but on wtablets of xhuman hearts.2
4 ySuch is the confidence that we have through Christ toward God. 5 zNot that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but aour sufficiency is from God, 6 who has made us sufficient to be bministers of ca new covenant, not of dthe letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but ethe Spirit gives life. [v]
Part Two: Covenant Reality is not a theological theory—it is a total worldview
We are back, looking again for the answers to questions yet asked. In tying this study to our previous study on false teachers/prophets, we looked at that which led us to see and begin to get a feel for voice and authority – what do we listen to, and who we listen for. This plays into our discussion today for now, we must define what Covenant Reality is, and what it isn’t.
First, we must set the playing field. I have mentioned this before: to understand what the Word of God is saying to us, we have to define terms and methods. There is a truism here in this statement: “Bible reading is not Bible study.”[vi]
Brethren, it is past the time to become as the Bereans:
we must be about the studying of our Bibles.
That said, there are many way to study Scripture, but for our purposes, I’d like to share a bottom-up methodology seven core laws to guide one into serious biblical exegesis. These “laws” were developed by the late (and great) Dr. Michael S. Heiser:
Dr. Heiser was a scholar who earned his PhD in Hebrew Bible and Semitic languages and held an MA in ancient history and Hebrew studies. He was the coeditor of Old Testament Greek Pseudepigrapha with Morphology and Semitic Inscriptions: Analyzed Texts and English Translations, and he was able to do translation work in roughly a dozen ancient languages, including Biblical Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, Egyptian hieroglyphs, and Ugaritic cuneiform. He also specialized in Israelite religion (especially Israel’s divine council), contextualizing biblical theology with Israelite and ancient Near Eastern religion, Jewish binitarianism, biblical languages, ancient Semitic languages, textual criticism, comparative philology, and Second Temple period Jewish literature. He went to be with his Lord in 2023. I have mentioned his work before, and his methodology to study the Bible is how I study today.
As I mentioned before, there are many ways to study, so please pick one and get serious about the Word. This is mine, Dr. Heiser’s seven core laws (and explanations) for serious bible study…
The Core Laws for Bible Study
1.
There is no
substitute for close attention to the biblical text.
You should be observing the
biblical text in the original languages. If you cannot, never trust one
translation in a passage. Use several and then learn skills for understanding
why they disagree. These skills would be things like learning grammatical terms
and concepts, along with translation philosophy and the basics of textual
criticism.
2.
Patterns in the text
are more important than word studies.
You need to learn to trace threads and ideas through the Bible and observe how
the New Testament re-purposes and interprets the Old Testament. If you aren’t
paying attention to these things, you’re missing more than you think you’re
seeing..
3.
The Bible must be
interpreted in context, and that context isn't your own or that of your
theological tradition.
The context of the Bible is the context that produced it—ancient Near
East/Mediterranean.
In other words, if you’re letting your theological tradition filter the Bible to you, you aren’t doing Bible study or exegesis, and you aren’t interpreting the Bible in context.
4.
The Bible is a
divine-human book; treat it as such.
Put another way, God chose people to write the biblical text, and people write
using grammar, in styles understood by their peers, and with deliberate
intent—and so the Bible did not just drop from heaven. Study it as though some
person actually wrote it, not like it is the result of a paranormal event. (The
Bible was written for a specific people, at a specific time, in a specific
place, and used their own specific worldview and culture.)
5.
If a passage is
weird, it's important.
When modern readers encounter bizarre, confusing, or seemingly out-of-place
details, the common temptation is to smooth them over or ignore them. These
"weird" elements are highly deliberate signals from the ancient
writers, explicitly designed to hook the original audience's attention and
convey crucial theological points.
6.
Systematic theology
is only useful if it is derived from the ground up through exegesis.
Put another way: Systematic theology isn’t helpful (and can be misleading) if
its conclusions are not derived from exegesis of the original text. Biblical
theology is done from the ground up, not the top down.
7.
If the text disturbs
you, you are paying close attention.
Serious exegesis will inevitably challenge comfort zones, disrupt inherited
assumptions, and force a reader to grapple with difficult textual realities.
Encountering these moments is a healthy sign of honest, rigorous study. [vii]
I encourage you all to invest in your biblical studies as best you can, but these rules for Bible study changed the way I not only read the Scriptures, but the manner in which I try to interpret them and then teach them. To this end then, this section of our study may, by some, be considered “dry” or too “technical”. But to study the Word of God, I try to establish what I speak of according to this methodology. I am not trying to overwhelm you; I give this information to aid you in understanding what it is you are reading.
Let us return to our study.
If we asked a modern church-going believer today what the term Covenant Reality meant, we probably would get 1 of two possible answers:
1. Most (the casual bible reader) have not ever heard the term; thus they would have no answer for us.
2. If they are a “dedicated reader”, they may have heard the term and been given this definition for it: “The term "covenant reality" (often specifically called the new covenant reality) is a Christian theological concept that describes living out the day-to-day life, identity, and blessings established by Jesus Christ through the New Covenant, rather than relying on Old Testament laws, rituals, or human performance. [New Testament based.]
Both are unfortunately wrong, a part of the misinformation we discussed in Part One. Why do I say this? Let us see:
1) In number 1, the casual reader of the Bible is an average, non-specialist church attendee. They more relate to how the message applies to their daily life, relationships, and struggles.
(a) They read scripture mainly for encouragement, comfort and moral guidance, while taking the text at face value and relying on the denominational or traditional interpretations passed down by their local congregation. Their misinformation may come from a denominations tradition, and not one supported by the raw text (original autograph).
2) This is the average layperson, regular churchgoer, or everyday believer who is consuming a text (like a parish bulletin, a religious book, or scripture) from the perspective of an ordinary practitioner rather than an academic theologian.
(a) Their most frequent question may be “How does any of this matter to my daily life?” A casual but dedicated reader does not approach a text to critique its complex historical syntax, source-criticism, or theological minutiae. They filter the text through a highly practical lens, thinking about their job, their family, and their personal struggles.
(b) They are “dedicated” in the sense they show up, they are invested, and they genuinely want to read and learn, but if they think the explanations are to dry or academic, they quickly disengage or feel that the message "goes over their head".
(c) Their level of misinformation comes usually from a denominational playbook, which tends to soften the message with aim “to protect the hearer from their Bible.”
Both approaches rob the believer of the deeper things of God by either sheltering people from difficult texts which leaves them vulnerable or by not encouraging a more robust dialogue. When believers are unfamiliar with hard or unconventional passages, critics and skeptics can exploit those gaps in knowledge to dismantle their faith.[viii]
No, we fail the average reader and somewhat dedicated reader by not giving them the truth about what the Covenant Reality is.
What Covenant Reality is:
It is that which is built upon the foundation of that the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament, or Tanakh), which comprises the vast majority of Scripture and is fundamentally built around the concept of covenant. The phrase "covenant reality" actually makes far more linguistic and thematic sense when viewed through its profoundly Jewish backdrop, viewed from the aspect of the Second Temple Era, roughly 516 BCE to 70 AD and spanning six centuries of Jewish history in the Southern Levant.[ix] [x]
Moreover, it is:
- An Initiative of Pure Grace: Entrance into the covenant was understood to be entirely an act of God’s election and mercy. God chose Israel; Israel did not earn their way into His favor. [xi]
- An "Elected Relationship of Obligation under Oath": Once inside the covenant by grace, the Jewish people were bound by oath to obey the Law (Torah). Obedience was the expected response to being chosen, not the payment for it. [xii]
- A Mechanism for Maintenance, Not Entry: Keeping the commandments, offering sacrifices, and following the purity laws were the means of staying in the covenant relationship, not getting into it. It was about preserving one's position in God's family. [xiii]
- Active and Unresolved: Even though Israel was historically judged exiled, and living under foreign pagan empires (like Rome), the covenant was not considered dead or canceled. The re-imposed Torah, resumed temple sacrifices, and continued prophetic expectations meant the covenant administration was fully intact, even if it was waiting for its final, messianic resolution. [xiv]
- Active and Unresolved: Even though Israel was historically judged, exiled, and living under foreign pagan empires (like Rome), the covenant was not considered dead or canceled. The re-imposed Torah, resumed temple sacrifices, and continued prophetic expectations meant the covenant administration was fully intact, even if it was waiting for its final, messianic resolution. [xiv]
- Accompanied by Provision for Failure: The covenant reality factored in human sin. It provided the sacrificial system, Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement), and repentance as God's gracious tools for restoration when the law was broken. [xv]
· The Roots of the "New Covenant" are 100% Jewish.
If and when Christian teachers use the term "covenant reality", it would usually be used to describe a heart transformed by grace; but it is here that they are actually quoting the Hebrew Prophet Jeremiah. In Jeremiah 31:31-33, God promises a New Covenant (B'rit Hadasha). Crucially, God does not say He is throwing away His law; He says,
"I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts."
From a Jewish perspective then, the ultimate "covenant reality" is a state where a person's inner desires are perfectly aligned with God's will—moving from external compliance to an internalized, organic lifestyle of holiness.
Summary Comparison
|
Perspective |
What "Covenant Reality" Emphasizes |
|
Common Christian Usage |
Freedom from legalism; resting in the finished, saving work of Messiah. |
|
Authentic Jewish Backdrop |
An active, daily partnership (alliance) where every ordinary action is elevated into a holy act of devotion to God. |
What the Covenant Reality IS NOT:
· It IS NOT "Work-Righteousness" or Legalism: For decades, historical Christian theology assumed Second Temple Judaism was a transactional religion where people frantically racked up "merit points" to out-balance their sins and earn salvation. Second Temple literature (such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, Apocrypha, and Pseudepigrapha) directly contradicts this—they viewed salvation as corporate and rooted in God's historical deliverance.
· It IS NOT Just a "Sociological Identity Marker": While modern scholars sometimes reduce covenant signs (like circumcision, food laws, and Sabbath keeping) to mere "boundary markers" meant to separate Jews from Gentiles socially, the ancient texts show it was much deeper. It wasn't a catch-all word for "community" or "relationship"—it was a specific, vertical, binding treaty with the Creator of the universe.
· It IS NOT Permanently Broken or Erased: When prophets or texts spoke of a "broken covenant," it did not mean the contract was voided and God had permanently abandoned Israel. Breaking the covenant simply triggered the consequences (the curses or exile) outlined in the original Mosaic treaty. The underlying relationship remained completely binding, looking forward to a "New Covenant" that would write the law directly on human hearts. While Jewish theology absolutely contains future promises and eschatological hopes (such as the Messianic era), the covenant (Brit) itself is treated as an active, binding, and eternal reality that dictates how a Jewish person lives in the present moment.[xvi] [xvii]
The Second Temple "Covenant Reality": Esoteric vs. Embodied
To gain further insights into the idea of the Covenant Reality and Apostolic Leadership rooted in the Second Temple period (c. 516 BCE – 70 CE), one must step out of the modern Western paradigms. What follows is a conceptual framework designed to help one navigate this worldview.
The Second Temple "Covenant Reality": The views
We see the breakdown of what this distinction means within that historical and scriptural worldview:
The Esoteric Reality (Hidden, Restrictive, Cosmic)
- Sectarian & Apocalyptic Seclusion: Groups like the Qumran community (associated with the Dead Sea Scrolls) believed the mainstream Temple establishment was corrupt. They viewed the true covenant reality as an exclusive mystery revealed only to their community. To them, understanding the cosmic battle between light and darkness required special, hidden knowledge.
- The Heavenly Realm: The esoteric view emphasizes the transcendence of the covenant. It focuses on the heavenly realities, the divine council, and the hidden mechanics of the supernatural realm.
- Mediated Access: In this framework, ordinary people are kept at a distance. Access to the divine presence is strictly tiered, managed by an elite priesthood, or restricted to those who possess the "secret" interpretation of the text.
The embodied approach stands in stark contrast to this. It represents the covenant reality breaking through from the cosmic realm into physical, tangible human history. It is the conviction that the covenant is meant to be lived out, walked out, and made visible on earth.
This sounds like fiction, but there is substantial peer-reviewed biblical scholarship that underpins the concepts behind that phrasing and the underlying theological tension—comparing sectarian mystical/gnostic withdrawal against bodily, communal, and historical covenant life—is a well-established debate across several major fields of Second Temple and New Testament scholarship.
When I
talk about the “The Second Temple ‘Covenant Reality’: Esoteric vs.
Embodied”; this is not academic jargon, but more on the
lines of popular ministerial and homiletical phrasing, something for the
masses. This is one place where certain
pastors and content creators (Facebook, YouTube, X, Instagram, etc.) often use AI
tools to synthesize and polish ministry posts.
- Apostolic and Communal Leadership: True apostolic leadership in this context is not about claiming a secret, elite status to rule over others. Instead, it is about embodying the sacrificial love and character of the Messiah. The leader becomes a visible, living demonstration of the covenant—making the unseen reality of God's kingdom tangible to the community.
· N.T. Wright, who argues extensively that Paul and the Gospel writers envisioned God's covenant reality as embodied within historical creation.
· The late Richard Hays who focused on the embodied ethics of the New Testament.
· The late Dr. Michael S. Heiser whose scholarship dealing with early Jewish mysticism (Merkavah or "Chariot" traditions) directly contrasts with the apostolic view of incarnation, through exploring Second Temple apocalyptic and divine-council theology.
· The late Larry Hurtado and Richard Bauckham who wrote that the early Jesus movement radically adapted Second Temple concepts by locating God's ultimate covenant presence in the embodied person of Jesus of Nazareth and His apostles.
Other scholars such as E.P. Sanders (who was instrumental in the “New Perspective on Paul”), Florentino García Martínez & Lawrence Schiffman both wrote on the Qumran community (Essenes and the Dead Sea Scrolls), and G.K. Beale who specializes in the New Testament use of the Old Testament and a theological tome on the book of Revelation are just a handful of the scholarly work in this academic field.
When we observe the Second Temple worldview as given above, we see these concepts were not abstract theological systems; they were concrete, politically charged, and profoundly communal realities. Looking at this through a Jewish Messianic approach requires understanding how the First Century followers of Yeshua (Jesus) understood authority, community, and the prophetic destiny of Israel. What we see then in this era, is that the overarching narrative of Jewish life was about "Exile and Restoration." Even though the Jewish people had returned to the land, they were physically occupied by Rome, and spiritually, many felt the Divine Presence (Shechinah) had not fully returned to the Temple in the way described by the prophets. We will cover this in a later installment of this series.
· The B'rit as a Cosmic Commonwealth: To the Second Temple Jew, a covenant was a boundary-marking reality. It dictated who belonged to the Am Yisrael (the People of Israel) and who did not.
· The Multi-Generational Continuum: Covenant reality meant that the events of Sinai were not historical text; they were a living, present continuous contract. To obey the mitzvot (commandments) under the guidance of the Spirit was to manifest the future Messianic Era in the present day.
· The Interiorized Torah: Based on the Second Temple expectations (visible in texts like the Dead Sea Scrolls and early Messianic writings), the New Covenant reality meant the Torah would move from external stone tablets to the human heart via the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit). This wasn't the abolition of Torah, but its ultimate interiorization—making obedience natural and organic rather than forced.
Apostolic Leadership: Shalichut and the Second Temple Model
Modern readers often view an "Apostle" through a Greek or Western corporate lens (a church planter, a top-tier executive, or a bishop). In the Second Temple era though, the concept is entirely Hebraic.
The Greek word Apostolos is a direct translation of the Hebrew term Shaliach (שליח).
The Law of Agency (Shalichut)
In Second Temple jurisprudence and Rabbinic tradition, a Shaliach is a legal agent sent out with a specific mission. The foundational legal maxim of this concept is found in the Mishnah (Berakhot 5:5):
"A man's agent is like the man himself" (Shelucho shel adam kemoto, שלוחו של אדם – כמותו.).
· The Shaliach Carries the King's Authority: When Yeshua chose twelve Shlichim (Apostles), He was operating squarely within Second Temple legal conventions. They did not carry their own authority, credentials, or branding. They carried the literal presence, legal authority, and words of the Sender. To reject the Shaliach was to reject the King; to receive the Shaliach was to receive the King. True Apostolic Leadership acts as the authorized Shaliach of the Messiah, cutting through the noise by holding up an objective standard: "This is what the King said".
· The Prophetic Symbol of Twelve: In the Second Temple era, the number twelve was a radical prophetic statement. It signaled the Restoration of the Twelve Tribes of Israel. By appointing twelve Shlichim, Yeshua was announcing that the fragmented, exiled covenant reality of Israel was actively being gathered and rebuilt under His Messianic leadership.
When Yeshua tells His disciples in John 13:20, 'Whoever receives the one I send receives me,' He isn't inventing a new mystical concept. He is practicing First-Century jurisprudence. In a world filled with a chaos of conflicting voices, Yeshua establishes order by commissioning legal agents (shlichim). An apostle’s authority does not come from their personal resume or a denominational playbook; it rests entirely on the exact faithfulness with which they echo the original Sender.
Merging the Two:
How Apostolic Leadership Serves Covenant Reality
In this study, the intersection of these two concepts is where the practical application lies. In the Second Temple Messianic community, Apostolic Leadership existed solely to steward (guide) and protect the Covenant Reality - guiding individual hearts into an unshakeable, interiorized bond with YHVH, where they can clearly discern His voice for themselves.
The Leaders are Guardians of the Ketubah (Marriage Contract)
As seen earlier, the Covenant is a marriage. The Apostles did not act as corporate managers; they acted as Shoshbinim (friends of the bridegroom/best men). Their job was to guard the purity of the Bride (the community) and ensure she remained faithful to the Covenant.
Managing the Tension of "The In-Between"
Apostolic leadership in the First Century had to navigate a massive covenantal shift:
How do Jewish believers and Gentile believers coexist in the same Covenant Reality?
The Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 is the ultimate Second Temple legal ruling (halakha). The Apostles used their authority as Shlichim of the Messiah to rule that Gentiles could enter the Covenant Reality of God as Gentiles, without undergoing full Rabbinic circumcision, provided they abandoned idolatry. This expanded the borders of the Covenant Commonwealth without destroying the unique identity of Israel.
From "Epistemological Crisis" to "Covenant Reality"
In Part One, we established that the modern influx of competing voices—social media, cultural politics and AI et. al.— is structurally identical to the serpent’s question in Eden:
"Did God actually say...?"
I then noted in that humanity's primary breakdown was an epistemological crisis, forcing humans into choosing whose version of reality they were to trust.
How were we to resolve this issue?
In Second Temple thought, the only antidote to an epistemological crisis was a shared, objective Covenant Reality. For this to be achieved, we must conclude that "hearing God" isn't a mystical, hyper-individualized experience where people try to catch a whisper in their minds. Instead, hearing God happens within the boundaries of the Covenant community.
The Covenant then is the baseline of reality;
it dictates what is true, what is holy, and whose voice carries authority.
But… who told them that?
Whose voice? Whose authority?
To answer this, we have to weave together two narratives that highlight the problem:
This is then the "Crisis of Authority" that leaves human beings paralyzed by competing voices, vulnerable to deception because of our unchecked internal inclinations.
And this we will unpack and answer the questions spoken when we meet again next time.
Till then, may Elyon bless you and keep all
Amein.
[i] FAIR USE DISCLAIMER: This blog site may contain content that is not authorized for use by its owner. All such material will be cited back to its original source. According to Section 107 of the Copyright Act: “…the fair use of a copyrighted work […] for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright…” I have made and will continue to make every effort to stay within all ethical and moral guidelines in the use of material presented here, and the use of these materials is solely intended for educational purposes only, and all efforts to obtain or sustain fair use of non-owned material will be made.
[ii] Author’s note: This site is for education only and is not affiliated with any institution, organization, or religious group. It is the sole production of its editor/author. Use of information from Jewish-themed websites (or any other source material) should not be construed as these sites endorsing or confirming any thesis introduced by the author of this epistle. I present the information from their respective sites for instructional purposes only and/or to aid in the readers understanding of the subjects discussed.
[iii] Author’s note: Throughout these studies, I will be using the NET Bible® and the NET Notes®: within the notes you will see symbols like this: ( א B Ψ 892* 2427 sys). These are abbreviations used by the NET Bible® for identifying the principal manuscript evidence that they (authors and translators of the NET Bible®) used in translating the New Testament. Please go to https://bible.org/netbible/ and see their section labeled “NET Bible Principals of Translation” for a more complete explanation on these symbols and other items pertinent to the way the NET Bible uses them. This is not to say that the NET® Bible will be our only source of God’s word but will be used as seen fit.
[iv] Author’s Note: In these studies, I have used the notes that come along with the passages I cite from the sources that I cite: these need a bit of a disclaimer though. As in all things, not everything that is footnoted is something that I necessarily agree with, especially if it contradicts what I believe pertains to any matters of the Torah or the commandments of God. I give you the notes as they are written by the authors of the material I cite from, so that you can see the information contained within them. It truly is not my place to edit them; if they state anything that is in opposition to what I teach, then so be it. I will address these issues if requested. That is not to say I should not challenge something I believe, in my humble opinion, might contradict the truth of God’s word; that I will do in the main body of my epistles for that is where my gentle dissent belongs. Most (but not all) of the differences will come when I quote from a source that displays a decidedly Western/Greek mindset, as opposed to a Hebraic perspective. I must be intellectually honest – I am biased toward the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and His son, Yeshua the Messiah. I pray then we all can find common ground as we study the Scriptures. Also, some may be put off by the length or depth of the notes; not everyone has access to the references I do, therefore I try to include the notes that come with the material I use, so each can see for themselves the information the originator has pointedly gleaned. I hope you avail yourselves to these inclusions – they help us to understand how the material in scripture is laid out – the thought process of the original writer.
q ch. 5:12; 10:12; 12:11
r [ch. 11:4]
s [Acts 18:27; 1 Cor. 16:3]
t [1 Cor. 9:2]
1 Some manuscripts your
u See Matt. 16:16
v Ex. 24:12
w Prov. 3:3; 7:3; Jer. 17:1
x Ezek. 11:19; 36:26; [Jer. 31:33; Heb. 8:10]
2 Greek fleshly hearts
y Eph. 3:12
z [Eph. 2:8]
a See 1 Cor. 15:10
b Eph. 3:7; Col. 1:23, 25; [ch. 4:1; 5:18; 1 Tim. 1:12]
c Jer. 31:31; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25; Heb. 8:8, 13; [ver. 14; Heb. 9:15]
d See Rom. 2:27
e [John 6:63; Rom. 8:2]
[v] The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2025), 2 Co 3:1-6.
[vi] Heiser's Laws for Bible Study formulated by biblical scholar Dr. Michael S. Heiser.
[vii] Modified and taken from the following sites: https://www.logos.com/grow/heisers-laws-for-bible-study/ Accessed 10 October 2026; https://drmsh.com/heisers-laws-for-bible-study/ Accessed 13 October 2026.
[ix] See "Second Temple Period". Center for Online Judaic Studies. Retrieved 10 October 2026.
[x] See also https://jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jerusalem-during-the-second-temple-period Retrieved 10 October 2026.
[xi] From E-Journal of Religious and Theological Studies - September 2018 ISSN 2458 - 7338 Vol 4. No.1, THE ROLE OF COVENANT AND WORKS IN SALVATION: A SURVEY OF SECOND TEMPLE LITERATURE by DANIEL K. BEDIAKO Retrieved 13 October 2026
[xiii] From E-Journal of Religious and Theological Studies - September 2018 ISSN 2458 - 7338 Vol 4. No.1, THE ROLE OF COVENANT AND WORKS IN SALVATION: A SURVEY OF SECOND TEMPLE LITERATURE by DANIEL K. BEDIAKO Retrieved 13 October 2026
[xiv] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4Y7FW_Z_q8
[xv] From E-Journal of Religious and Theological Studies - September 2018 ISSN 2458 - 7338 Vol 4. No.1, THE ROLE OF COVENANT AND WORKS IN SALVATION: A SURVEY OF SECOND TEMPLE LITERATURE by DANIEL K. BEDIAKO Retrieved 13 October 2026
[xvi] https://torah.org/torah-portion/rabbiwein-5781-netzavim/
[xvii] Adapted from the book The Concept of the Covenant in the Second Temple Period (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism) by Stanley E Porter (Editor), Jacqueline C R de Roo (Editor)
[xviii] Accessed from https://d3nr8uzk0yq0qe.cloudfront.net/media/documents/Harris_Tania_-_Hearing_Gods_Voice.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment