Bible Question:
If the OT never ended and the NT and OT are in concerto then what about these scriptures? FIRST COVENANT - HEB 8:7 9:1 SECOND COVENANT - HEB 8:7 10:1-9 CAME BY MOSES - JOHN 1:17 CAME BY CHRIST - HEB 8:6 9:15 LAW OF MOSES - ACTS 13:38-39 LAW OF CHRIST - GAL 6:2 LAW OF SIN - ROM 7:23 8:2 LAW OF RIGHTEOUSNESS - ROM 9:31 LAW OF FLESH - ROM 7:5-6 LAW OF SPIRIT - ROM 8:2 NOT OF FAITH - GAL 3:12 LAW OF FAITH - ROM 3:27 YOKE OF BONDAGE - GAL 5:1 LAW OF LIBERTY - JAMES 1:25 ENDED BY CHRIST - ROM 10:4 STARTED BY CHRIST - HEB 8:6 10:9 |
Bible Answer: You asked, “If the OT never ended and the NT and OT are in concerto then what about these scriptures?” To begin with, we need to define the terms. The Old Testament is a list of books written prior to the Common Era and prior to the birth of the Messiah. The pre-Messiah era ended sometime between 1/1/04 BC and 12/31/02 BC. So in that sense, the Old Testament ended. However, the Old Testament does not equal Old Covenant. The OT contains covenants, but it is not a covenant itself. There are several covenants in the OT, such as Noah, Abraham, Sinai, David, and the New Covenant, but the OT as cannon is not equal to a covenant. Furthermore, I am going to assume that you agree that when Abraham received a covenant, the one given to Noah didn’t stop functioning. I also assume that when Moses received a covenant at Mt. Sinai, the covenant with Abraham didn’t stop functioning. Also, not every covenant is the same. Abraham received a covenant promise. It was something God would do through him. Moses received a covenant that required him and Israel to bring something to the table. For Israel to receive these earthly (this world) blessings from God, they would need to live within the covenant terms. If they, as a nation, did not live within the terms, then the curses would apply. All the curses and blessings are based in this physical world for that covenant. The New Testament also is not a new covenant, but a canon of books that come after the birth, death, and resurrection of Jesus. So the NT is not equal to New Covenant. It certainly speaks of the New Covenant, but it, as a grouping of books, is not a covenant. Before we continue, let me know if this is correct, or if we don’t agree to this point. I want to make sure we agree on some basics before I go into interpreting these verses so we don’t waist time. If we don’t agree on the above, then we should start there. If we do, then we can move on. Sound good? Since this Thread is not posted in the Home Page (for some odd reason), most of the other members of the forum will not be reading it, so it’s sort of a conversation between you and me. I hope we can have the conversation, because I think your experience in the faith is valuable and I’d cherish the chance to speak freely with someone of a different view. MJH |