To Abolish, Advance, and Accomplish the Old: The New Covenant in Jeremiah 31:31–34

This article originated as a exegetical paper written for the purpose of my studies with The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Spring 2024.

“In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete.” (ESV) In Hebrews 8:13, the author argues the promise of the new covenant means the passing of the old covenant. This is based on a close consideration of Jeremiah 31:31–34, which is quoted at length in 8:8–12. This paper will argue that Jeremiah 31:31–34 teaches that the new covenant abolishes, advances, and accomplishes the old covenant. As a result, it confirms the conclusion found in Hebrews 8.

This paper begins by examining the three key contexts for Jeremiah 31:31–34: (1) the canonical context, (2) the covenantal context, and (3) the compositional context. It argues that all of these contexts suggest that the new covenant brings about the abolishment, advancement, and accomplishment of the old covenant. This paper then examines the overall structure of Jeremiah 31:31–34, as well as its individual sections. It considers it in three parts: (1) the announcement (31:31), (2) the contrast with the old covenant (31:32), and (3) the contents of the new covenant (31:33–34). This paper demonstrates that each of these sections, as well as the overall structure, confirm that the old covenant is abolished, advanced, and accomplished in the new covenant. It then concludes by summarizing the argument and briefly drawing some implications for today.

The Context of Jeremiah 31:31–34

This paper will begin by examining the three key contexts for Jeremiah 31:31–34. It explores: (1) how this important passage relates to the entire biblical canon, (2) how it connects with its immediate covenantal period, and (3) where it is situated in the composition of Jeremiah.

Canonical Context

It is undeniable that Jeremiah 31:31–34, and the new covenant it contains, is of great significance for the entire cannon. This is immediately evident from the New Testament directly deriving its name from it. Further, the quotation of Jeremiah 31:31–34 in Hebrews 8:8–12 is its longest continuous quotation.[1] Given the author requotes it again less than two chapters later, in Hebrews 10:16-17, Walter Kaiser Jr. is correct to conclude that the new covenant seems to be an “important Biblical theme which promises to unify the two testaments.”[2] Indeed, it could be said that the new covenant is the great hinge that holds the whole of the biblical cannon together.

The new covenant is also considered in eight other New Testament texts: four on the Lord’s Supper (Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25; Matt 26:28; Mark 14:24), two other texts in Hebrews (9:15; 12:24), and twice in Paul (Rom 11:27; 2 Cor 3:6).[3] As discussed below, these references help to prove that the old covenant was abolished through the arrival of the new, for it advanced the blessings promised at Sinai and accomplished the original aims of the Mosaic covenant. This is clearly seen in Hebrews, where “the new covenant is given its most prominent place.”[4] For as George Guthrie observes, the use of Jeremiah 31:31–34 in 8:10–12 is vital for the author’s later discourse on Christ’s superior offering, showing that the new covenant achieves the forgiveness that was not previously possible.[5] In the same way, 2 Corinthians 3:6 stresses the advantage that the new covenant has over the old, for it is written on human hearts. As a result, Jack Lundbom concludes that Paul believes “the new covenant... surpasses all other covenants and is eternal.”[6]

While Jeremiah 31:31–34 is clearly significant in the New Testament, it is also firmly rooted in the Old Testament. This is true for the larger literary section that it belongs to, with Stephen Dempster noting a “strong link” between the Book of Consolation (Jeremiah 30–33) and portions of the Torah, particularly Deuteronomy, due to themes of exilic repentance, restoration, and heart change.[7] As demonstrated below, it is impossible to rightly understand the contents of the new covenant without considering previous biblical covenants, including with Abraham and David (Gen 17; 2 Sam 7). This is even evident from the passage itself, with Jeremiah drawing an explicit contrast with the Mosaic covenant in 31:32, explaining how the new covenant advances and accomplishes all that God previously promised after delivering his people from Egypt.

Covenantal Context

Jeremiah 31:31 is the only Old Testament occurrence of the phrase “new covenant”. As a result, Kaiser is correct to label it the “locus classicus” on the theme.[8] Nevertheless, despite the uniqueness of the phrase, the general concept dominates the prophetic books. For example, there is an anticipation of a new relationship with the Lord elsewhere in Jeremiah (24:7), as well as Ezekiel (36:27–28), Isaiah (49:8; 55:1–5; 59:21; 61:8), and Malachi (Mal 3:1). These all lead Lundbom to conclude the “new covenant forms the centerpiece of a larger hope that includes a new act of salvation, a new Zion, and a new Davidic king.”[9] Therefore, the prophetic writings state that the new covenant will advance the situation of God’s people, accomplishing the aim that the Lord when he choose them in Abraham, saved them from Egypt, and gave them David.

However, the prophets not only include a general anticipation of a new arrangement, but they explicitly reference this “new covenant” using various other terms in sixteen different passages.[10] This includes the “everlasting covenant” (Jere 32:40; 50:5; Isa 24:5; 55:3; 61:8; Ezek 16:60; 37:26), a “new heart and a new spirit” (Ezek 11:19; 18:31; 36:26), a “covenant of peace” (Isa 54:10; Ezek 34:25; 37:26), and simply “covenant” (Isa 42:6; Hos 2:18–20). As seen further below, it is clear from many of these references that the old covenant will be abolished, and the new covenant will realize what it failed to achieve. For example, Hosea 2:18–20 declares Israel will finally be betrothed to the Lord in faithfulness forever, just as anticipated when “she came out of the land of Egypt” (2:15). This paper shows Jeremiah 31:31–34 follows the exact same pattern, announcing a new covenant that abolishes, advances, and accomplishes the old covenant.

Compositional Context

Jeremiah is not only the longest book in the Bible, but also considered to be one of the most difficult to interpret due to its dark themes and non-chronological arrangement.[11] However, Duane Garrett suggests readers can better understand it if they discern the “carefully developed, in fact brilliant, structure.”[12] Rather than being a “chaotic hodgepodge,” he argues Jeremiah is a chiasm with a prominent center.[13] In this structure, the prologue relating Jeremiah’s commission (1:1–19) corresponds with the epilogue recording Jerusalem’s fall  (52:1–34). The second section (2:1–20:18) also matches the penultimate section (46:1–51:64), as both have two anthologies on Judah and the nations. The third portion (21:1–29:32) corresponds with the fifth (34:1–45:5), as they narrate the historical messages during the reign of Jehoiakim. This means that the structural center is Jeremiah 30–33, commonly called the Book of Consolation. These four chapters focus on the promised salvation that involves “the new covenant, the Davidic Messiah, the regathering of Israel, and the eternal glory of Zion.”[14] Therefore, despite the darkness of most of the book, which is caused by the curses that come under the old covenant, it has a bright structural core, and hopeful central message, in the Book of Consolation, with the arrival of the new covenant.

Even scholars who understand Jeremiah to be arranged differently, like Jerry Hwang, argue that the Book of Consolation offers a “compelling summary of the entire book.”[15] The new covenant is crucial in this, not only appearing in 31:31–34, but also reappearing in both 32:36–41 and 33:12–26. The Book of Consolation clearly comes in two sections (30:1–31:40; 32:1–33:26), with God speaking to Jeremiah twice (30:1; 32:1). This twofold division means that 31:31–34 sits at its heart, which itself is situated at the center of Jeremiah. Lundbom also points out that 31:31–34 even occupies a “climactic position” in the middle of the wider unit in 31:23–40, with a similar number of words before and after it.[16] In this way, it is no exaggeration to view 31:31–34 as the bright core at the center of Jeremiah, and the new covenant as the hope at its heart.

Despite the centrality of 31:31–34, it is arguable that the unit should also encompass 31:35–37. Afterall, in this section the introductory formula of “Behold, the days are coming,” introduces three individual oracles at 31:27, 31:31 and 31:38. As a result, it could be concluded that 31:35–37 is a continuation of the second oracle that begins in 31:31–34. There is certainly a thematic link, with 31:35–37 adding “a pledge of permanence to the arrangements of the new covenant.”[17] This pledge has two parts, both introduced by the phrase, “Thus says the LORD” (31:35; 31:37). Both focus on the unchanging choice of God in making a new covenant with his people in 31:31–34. However, as John Mackay suggests, these verses are best seen as “a separate expansion of the thought of 31:31–34 rather than being integral to it, and it is more satisfactory to treat them as a separate sub-unit.”[18] In any event, this pledge of permanence supports the view that the new covenant abolishes, advances, and accomplishes the old one. For this permanence is in direct contrast with how God casts Israel off in the Mosaic covenant (Jere 7:15; 23:24; 52:3).

The immediate emphasis of the verses preceding 31:31–34 also provides an important context for their interpretation. Gentry and Wellum likewise identify 31:31–34 as a single unit.[19] However, they argue that understanding 31:27–30 is a crucial step towards interpretating it. As explained further below, this previous oracle also envisages new arrangements between God and his people, with individuals no longer bearing the sins of previous generations, as they did under the law of Moses (Exod 20:5; 34:7). Instead, in the future, people will only be held accountable for their own guilt (Jere 31:30). This is another example of how the coming new covenant will abolish and advance the arrangement under the old covenant, as is further stressed in 31:31–34.

The Text of Jeremiah 31:31–34

Having considered the context of Jeremiah 31:31–34, this paper will now examine the text itself. It will begin by assessing the basic structure of the unit, before then considering each of its three main sections: (1) the announcement (31:31), (2) the contrast with the old covenant (31:32), and (3) the contents of the new covenant (31:33–34). By doing so, it will demonstrate that both the overall structure of the unit, as well as each of its individual sections, asserts that the new covenant results in the abolition, advancement, and accomplishment of the old covenant.

Overall Structure

The basic structure of Jeremiah 31:31–34 is quite straightforward.[20] After the initial prophetic announcement (31:31), it has two main sections. The first draws a contrast with the old covenant (31:32). The second section considers the contents of the new covenant (31:33–34). A clear confirmation of this twofold division is the repetition of the phrase “declares the LORD,” which acts as a marker at the start (31:31; 31:33) and at the end (31:32; 31:34) of both sections.[21]As stated above, this basic structure clearly compares the new covenant favorably with the old.

The basic logic of the unit is also uncontroversial. It involves an a fortiori argument, with a comparison made from something lesser to something greater. As Gary Schnittjer shows, this occurs several times throughout Jeremiah, with the greatness of a future hope highlighted by drawing a contrast with a great work of God in the past.[22] For example, in 3:16–17, the presence of God with his people in the future is emphasized by declaring that they will no longer speak of the ark of the covenant. Similarly, in 16:14 and 23:7, Jeremiah states that they will no longer talk of the Exodus, for it will be overshadowed by the promised return from exile. These statements all use something great as the lesser reality in order to emphasize something else as even better.[23] In 31:31–34, Jeremiah’s oracle uses the old covenant as the lesser reality so as to stress and show the contrasting greatness of the new covenant. Therefore, the basic structure and logical flow of the unit also support the conclusion that the new covenant is an advancement on the old one.

Despite general agreement on the basic structure and logic of the unit, there is some dispute regarding the precise logical connections between each clause. For example, Gentry and Wellum propose a similar basic understanding, indicating that a contrast with the old covenant (31:32), and the contents of the new covenant (31:33–34), both add specific details to the initial announcement (31:31). However, they also go further, proposing that the reason that Jeremiah gives for the new covenant not being like the old covenant is “because” God’s people broke the Mosaic covenant, “although” the Lord was a husband to them. In this way, they hold that the old covenant has been abolished, and the new covenant is an advancement, for will be unbreakable. After specifying that the new covenant means the internalization of the law (31:33a), they argue the “immediate result” of this internalization is corporate fellowship with God (31:33b), with the “ultimate result” being the cessation of teaching (31:34a), which is “because” of the universal knowledge that is enjoyed (31:34b), which is ultimately “based” on the forgiveness of sins.[24]

The exact logical order of these elements in the new covenant is disputed by Andrew Shead, who instead sees forgiveness (31:34b) as foundational for not only universal knowledge (31:34a), but for the entire unit, including the contrast with the old covenant and all the contents of the new covenant.[25] If this is true, then the logical flow once again supports the argument that the new covenant is an advancement on the old, for it provides a kind of forgiveness that finally establishes a firm relationship between God and his people forever. As Shead observes, this is a reversal of the usual order of forgiveness under the old covenant, epitomized in Jeremiah 5:1–7, where forgiveness comes after a sinner returns to God, rather than precedes it, as it does here.[26]

Prophetic Announcement (Verse 31)

The announcement of the new covenant begins with the phrase, “Behold, the days are coming” (31:31). This also occurs in both 31:27 and 31:38, introducing oracles around the unit, and in the introduction to the Book of Consolation (30:3). This is another indicator that 31:31–34 is central to the wider structure of the book. Regardless, it is not a technical eschatological term, for Gentry and Wellum show that while it is common in Jeremiah (appearing fifteen times), it is rare in the rest of the Old Testament (occurring only six times).[27] As a result, the term is simply a prediction about the future, for which there is no precise timescale. However, Mackay is correct to note “the idea that what is to come is already determined and has in fact begun to emerge.”[28]

Thompson highlights that the passage that proceeds from this “simple announcement” is “one of the most important” and “one of the deepest insights in the whole Old Testament.”[29] This paper will now consider the two key components of this announcement: (1) the covenant that will be made in the future (31:31a), and (2) the nation that it will be made with (31:31b).

New Covenant (Verse 31a).  As Mackay explains, covenant is the basic religious metaphor of the Old Testament.[30] Rulers used them to regulate relationships with vassals, setting out the obedience they required, as well as what blessings and curses they would receive based on their faithfulness. The Old Testament clearly presents God as a “great king” (Pss 47:2; 48:2; 95:3; Mal 1:14) who regulates relationships with his people through covenants.[31] This includes the covenants with Noah (Gen 9), Abraham (Gen 17), Moses (Exod 24), and David (2 Sam 7).

The covenant announced in 31:31 is labelled “a new covenant,” the only place where this phrase occurs in the Old Testament. Scholars disagree over whether this is another renewal of the old covenant, as often occurred if Israel was unfaithful (Exod 34:1; Josh 24:19; 1 Chron 29:10), or if it is a brand new relationship.[32] Indeed, the word “new” itself is used in both ways in Scripture (Exod 1:8; Deut 32:17; 1 Sam 6:7; Lam 3:22–23).[33] Kaiser seeks to uphold this balance by stating the term “must serve both ideas: new in time and renewed in nature.”[34] However, we should let the contents of the covenant discussed below to be the arbiter of how new it really is.[35]

New Nation (Verse 31a). This new covenant will be made with “the house of Israel and the house of Judah.” This is the same party that breaks the Moasic covenant (5:11; 11:10), and Jeremiah promises will return from exile and enjoy a reunification (3:18). Given the nation was divided at the time, Mackay correctly concludes that “when the LORD restores his people it will not be as two divided, and often hostile, kingdoms, but as one united people of God.”[36]

While some scholars reject the suggestion that this includes gentile nations,[37] Gentry and Wellum observe that previous passages in Jeremiah announce their inclusion. For example, in Jeremiah 4:1–2, Israel’s return to the Lord fulfills the promise of Genesis 12:3.[38] It is also seen in 12:14–17 and 16:14–18, with the latter referred to in Matthew 4:19, as Jesus calls his disciples “fishers of men.”[39] As a result, Gentry and Wellum argue that the expectation across Jeremiah is that a returned and reunified Israel will include the gentile nations.[40] This interpretation is clearly confirmed by the reference to the new covenant in the Lord’s Supper, which is given to disciples as followers of Jesus, rather than as ethnic Israelites, as well as the reference to the new covenant in Romans 11:25–25, and the general overall truth of Ephesians 2–3 and Revelation 21:10–16.[41]

Old Covenant Contrast (Verse 32)

The second section clearly contrasts the new covenant with a previous covenant. This paper now establishes the identity of this covenant, and the meaning of it being “broke” in 31:32.

Mosaic Covenant (Verse 32a). Given the explicit reference to Egypt, 31:32 is clearly speaking of the covenant made with the Exodus generation at Sinai. As a result, it is the Mosaic covenant, and not the Abrahamic or Davidic, that the author is referring to. While such language is not used elsewhere to describe the deliverance from Egypt, it is used as a metaphor of parental guidance in Hosea 11:3.[42] As Mackay comments, this phrase “denotes the care and tenderness he displayed towards them.”[43] This only underlines the seriousness of their unfaithfulness in 31:32b.

Broken Covenant (Verse 32b). Lundhom points out that the present tense used for “break” here is strong, and occurs elsewhere to also refer to the breaking of the Mosaic covenant (Deut 31:16, 20: Lev 26:15; Jere 11:10; Ezek 16:59; 44:7).[44] Given the reference to the Lord as “husband”, it is clear they have not only rebelled against a king, but committed spiritual adultery, responding to God’s tender love with marital unfaithfulness. As a result, their actions “may well go beyond the idea of violating the terms of the covenant by breaking the stipulations in it, to encompass the idea of rendering the covenant null and void.”[45] This certainly seems to be the interpretation of Hebrews 8:7–13, which declares that the announcement of the new covenant is enough to make the old covenant “obsolete.” Indeed, Gentry and Wellum point out that this is also the emphasis in Jeremiah 31 itself, for it is not described as the first or the old covenant, but as the “broke” covenant.[46] From this, Mackay concludes that it seems that “the existing covenant arrangements provided no basis for any further relationship between God and the people.”[47] The arrival of the new covenant, and its new relationship with God, results in the abolition of the old.

New Covenant Contents (Verses 33–34)

In 31:33–34, Jeremiah stresses four key aspects of the new covenant: (1) internalized law (31:33a), (2) corporate fellowship (31:33b), (3) universal knowledge (31:34a) and (4) eternal forgiveness (31:34b). Kaiser argues these are mostly “repetition.”[48] However, as shown below, each element is a clear advancement on the old covenant. Indeed, the overarching improvement, evidenced by the repeated refrain of what the Lord will do, is that the old covenant was bilateral, while the new covenant is unilateral, with the Lord alone acting to enable Israel’s faithfulness.[49]

Internalized Law (31:33a). The writing of God’s law on their hearts does not mean a change in God’s standards, but in their ability to keep them.[50] As Robert Alter explains, “every person in Israel will be inwardly informed of what God expects, and no teachers or external force will be required.”[51] This is not just the imparting of information, but transformation of heart, “the center of one’s life—the inner person where one reasons, feels and makes decisions and plans.”[52]

This element is clearly supposed to contrast with the law under the Mosaic covenant, which was written on tablets of stone (Exod 24:12). It was envisaged that this would eventually be ingrained on the hearts of the people (Deut 6:6; 11:18; 30:6).[53] However, while some claimed to achieve this (Pss 37:31; 40:8),[54] it was far from being a universal experience. Rather, the heart of Israel in the Old Testament is mainly described as hard and stubborn, as Jeremiah himself says eight times (3:17; 7:24; 9:13; 11:8; 13:10; 16:12; 18:12; 23:17).[55] Furthermore, in 17:1, he states, “The sin of Judah is written with a pen of iron; with a point of diamond it is engraved on the tablet of their heart.” He also calls the heart “deceitful above all things” (17:9). Such “heart talk” in Jeremiah, as well as Deuteronomy, is important background for the announcement of the new covenant.[56] It is also a prelude to similar themes in the rest of the prophetic writings (Ezek 11:19; 36:26). It demonstrates that the new covenant is a significant advancement on the old covenant, as Paul highlights in 2 Corinthians 3, because “the new covenant will impart a greater ability to obey.”[57] It also accomplishes the heart change that the old envisaged (Deut 6:6; 11:18; 30:6).

Corporate Fellowship (31:33b). The second aspect of the new covenant is the phrase, “I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” As Mackay comments, “This had always been the essence of the covenant relationship.”[58] It appears throughout Scripture in three main forms: (1) the Lord is labeled as Israel’s God (Gen 17:7–8; Exod 29:45; Lev 11:45; 22:33; 25:38; 26:45; Num 15:41; Ezek 34:24), (2) Israel is called his people (Deut 4:20; 7:6; 14:2; 27:9; 28:9; 1 Sam 12:22; 2 Kgs 11:17; Jere 13:11), and (3) both statements appear together (Exod 6:7; Lev 26:12; Deut 26:17, 19; 29:13; 2 Sam 7:24; Jer 7:23; 11:4; 24:7; 30:22; 31:1; 31:33; 32:38; Ezek 11:20; 14:11; 34:30; 36:28; 37:23, 27; Zech 8:8).[59] Jeremiah 31:33 is in the last and largest category.

These occurrences in the Pentateuch and prophetic writings demonstrate the formula mainly describes the relationship with God under the old and the new covenants. However, while this formula appeared in the Mosaic covenant, Thompson argues that Israel never fully realized it due to their sin.[60] Therefore, the new covenant is “the kind of covenant relationship that Yahweh has always sought with his people.”[61] It finally accomplishes the overt aim of the old covenant.

Universal Knowledge (31:34a). The third element could be easily misinterpreted. As Mackay rightly explains, it “is not to be understood as doing away with a teaching ministry, nor yet as rendering obsolete any exhortation one to the other.”[62] Gentry and Wellum show how the context of 31:29–30 is helpful. Under the old covenant, individuals suffered consequences due to the unfaithfulness of others.[63] This was because the covenant community was mixed. This meant that prophets had to call unbelieving members to knowing relationships with God.[64] However, in the new covenant, there will be no need for this, for all “know” him.[65] As Thompson says, this “carries its most profound connotation, intimate personal knowledge between two persons who are committed wholly to one another in a relationship that touches mind, emotion, and will.”[66]

This personal relationship with the Lord will exist in all members of the new covenant, “from the least of them to the greatest” (31:34a). This phrase could mean across either the age or social spectrum,[67] with the latter being more likely as it seems to be a reversal of Jeremiah 5:4–5, where neither the poor nor great are said to know the Lord.[68] In any event, from New Testament passages such as 1 John 2:20, it is clear that this reality is accomplished in the church.[69] This is an advancement on the situation under the old covenant, where sin arose due to “a personal lack of acquaintance with the character and will of the God they professed they served” (Jere 2:8; Hos 41:1; 6:6).[70] In this way, it also achieves the aim of the Old Testament (Num 11:29; Isa 54:13).

Eternal Forgiveness (31:34b).  The final element of the new covenant is forgiveness of sin, which is the most surprising and significant element of all. As Lundbom explains, it is an “extraordinary act of divine grace! No threat of punishment for violating the covenant; instead, a promise to forgive sins!”[71] This is a clear contrast with the old covenant, where stipulations for breaking the covenant are outlined in detail (Deut 28–30). Further, the people were warned that the Lord “will not forgive your transgressions or your sins” if they broke it (Josh 24:19–20). This shows how the new covenant is a significant advancement on the old covenant, for it was clear that Israel’s iniquity was to be remembered and punished, rather than forgiven (Exod 34:6–7).

This is the aspect of the new covenant most discussed in the New Testament, as “the Last Supper liturgy clearly conveys the idea that Jesus’ death, his shedding of blood, seals the new covenant.”[72] While the connection between the new covenant in Jeremiah 31:31 and Jesus’ blood is made explicit in Mark 14:24, Luke 22:20, and 1 Corinthians 11:25, Matthew goes even further, also including a reference to the forgiveness of 31:34, by declaring that it is “poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” Hebrews also focuses on this element of forgiveness, for after establishing the general superiority of the new covenant in 8:8–12, it goes on to specifically discuss the superiority of its offering over those of the old covenant offerings (9:1–10:18).[73] This is another clear demonstration that the new covenant advances and accomplishes the old. For in it, the full and final forgiveness that was impossible under the old covenant becomes a reality.

Conclusion

This paper has demonstrated that both the context and text of Jeremiah 31:31–34 teach the new covenant results in the abolition, advancement, and accomplishment of the old covenant. As the author of Hebrews concludes in 8:13, now the new covenant has arrived, the old covenant is no longer applicable to God’s people. The decisive forgiveness and internal heart change that are offered in the new covenant are also significant advancements on the arrangement of Moses. Furthermore, the universal personal relationship with the Lord, and the realization of corporate fellowship with him, accomplish the longstanding aims of the old covenant. In this way, the new covenant is truly a “better” covenant (Heb 8:6) than the one that was “broken” (Jere 31:32).

From the discussion above, it is clear that Jeremiah 31:31–34 is also “one of the most important, yet most sensitive of all theological texts,” with implications for “some of the greatest theological questions of our day.”[74]As Gentry and Wellum highlight, these include the nature of the church, the eschatological role of ethnic Israel, the person and work of Christ, the place of the Mosaic law in the Christian life, and the meaning of baptism and the Lord’s Supper.[75]As a result, it is clearly important for Christians to gain a firm grasp of the true nature of the new covenant in contrast with the old covenant, as described for them in Jeremiah 31:31–34.

[1] Peter J. Gentry and Stephen J. Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant: A Biblical-Theological Understanding of the Covenants, 2nd ed. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2018), 536.

[2] Walter C. Kaiser, “Old Promise and the New Covenant: Jeremiah 31:31-34,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 15 (1): 14. The important of this text is also clear from the prominence it enjoyed in the Qumran community, who believed itself to be the new covenant community. George H. Guthrie, “Hebrews,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, ed. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007), 971. J. A. Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1980), 580.

[3] Kaiser, “Old Promise and the New Covenant,” 14.

[4] Jack R. Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Anchor Yale Bible, vol. 2 (London: Yale University Press, 2008), 478.

[5] Guthrie, “Hebrews,” 970.

[6] Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36, 476.

[7] Stephen G. Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty: A Biblical Theology of the Hebrew Bible (Downers Grove, IL: InterVaristy Press, 2003), 166.

[8] Kaiser, “Old Promise and the New Covenant,” 14.

[9] Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36, 466.

[10] Walter C. Kaiser, Walking the Ancient Paths: A Commentary on Jeremiah (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2019), 368.

[11] Duane A. Garrett, “Jeremiah,” in The NASB Grace and Truth Study Bible, ed. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2021), 1013.

[12] Garrett, “Jeremiah,” 1013.

[13] Garrett, “Jeremiah,” 1014.

[14] Garrett, “Jeremiah,” 1014.

[15] Jerry Hwang, “Jeremiah,” in ESV Expository Commentary, ed. Iain M. Duguid, James M. Hamilton Jr. and Jay Sklar (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2022), 657. See also the structure in Andrew G. Shead, A Mouth Full of Fire: The Word of God in the Words of Jeremiah (Downers Grove, IL: InterVaristy Press, 2012).

[16] Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36, 465.

[17] John L. Mackay, Jeremiah: An Introduction and Commentary: Chapters 21–52, Mentor Commentaries, vol. 2 (Ross-shire, Scotland: Mentor, 2004), 239.

[18] Mackay, Jeremiah, 230.

[19] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 538.

[20]For example, Guthrie divides the unit into the same three basic movements. Guthrie, “Hebrews,” 971.

[21] Kaiser, “Old Promise and the New Covenant,” 14. See also Kaiser, Walking the Ancient Paths, 369.

[22] Gary Edward Schnittjer, Old Testament Use of Old Testament: A Book by Book Guide (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2021), 281.

[23] Schnittjer, Old Testament Use of Old Testament, 281.

[24] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 548.

[25] Shead, A Mouth Full of Fire, 197.

[26] Shead, A Mouth Full of Fire, 199.

[27] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 539.

[28] Mackay, Jeremiah, 233.

[29] Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah, 579.

[30] Mackay, Jeremiah, 233.

[31] Mackay, Jeremiah, 233.

[32] For discussion of this debate, see Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36, 466. See also Mackay, Jeremiah, 234.

[33] Mackay, Jeremiah, 233.

[34] Kaiser, “Old Promise and the New Covenant,” 17.

[35] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 547.

[36] Mackay, Jeremiah, 234. This aligns with the dominant theme of the Book of Consolation, which James Hamilton Jr. argues is Israel’s future restoration to the land after their unfaithfulness. James M. Hamilton, Jr. God’s Glory in Salvation through Judgment: A Biblical Theology. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 220.

[37] Lundbom states, “there is nothing to suggest that this new covenant will be made with an expanded Israel, including Gentiles.” Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36, 466–467. See also Kaiser, Walking the Ancient Paths, 370.

[38] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 531.

[39] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 534.

[40] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 540. See also Shead, A Mouth Full of Fire, 196.

[41] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 541, 546.

[42] Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36, 467. See also Mackay, Jeremiah, 234.

[43] Mackay, Jeremiah, 234.

[44] Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36, 467.

[45] Mackay, Jeremiah, 235.

[46] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 549.

[47] Mackay, Jeremiah, 235.

[48] Kaiser, “Old Promise and the New Covenant,” 19–21. Indeed, elsewhere Kaiser argues that at least three quarters of the contents of the new covenant existed previously. Kaiser, Walking the Ancient Paths, 369.

[49] Garrett, “Jeremiah,” 1067.

[50] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 551.

[51] Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible: A Translation with Commentary, vol. 2 (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2019), 967.

[52] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 551.

[53] Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36, 468.

[54] Kaiser, “Old Promise and the New Covenant,” 19.

[55] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 548.

[56] Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36, 468. See also Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 549.

[57] Hwang, “Jeremiah,” 656.

[58] Mackay, Jeremiah, 237.

[59] Schnittjer, Old Testament Use of Old Testament, 282.

[60] Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah, 581.

[61] Hwang, “Jeremiah,” 656.

[62] Mackay, Jeremiah, 237.

[63] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 555.

[64] Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36, 470.

[65] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 555.

[66] Thompson, The Book of Jeremiah, 581. Similarly, Mackay states it “goes beyond a mere knowledge of the facts of revelation to include an inner commitment to a party who is known.” Mackay, Jeremiah, 237.

[67] Mackay, Jeremiah, 238.

[68] Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36, 470.

[69] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 558.

[70] Mackay, Jeremiah, 237.

[71] Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36, 471.

[72] Lundbom, Jeremiah 21–36, 475.

[73] Guthrie, “Hebrews,” 970.

[74] Kaiser, “Old Promise and the New Covenant,” 11.

[75] Gentry and Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant, 767–839.