Five Reason Why the Old Covenant Is Not the New Covenant
Jan 11
1. The Old Covenant says “do this and live” the New Covenant has been done for us.
2. The Old Covenant’s purpose was to kill, the New Covenant’s purpose is so that you may live forever.
3. The Old Covenant was conditional the New Covenant is unconditional
4. The Old Covenant was temporary the New Covenant is everlasting
5. The Old Covenant was works based the New Covenant faith based.
Here are 5 reasons why the New Covenant is not the Old Covenant. Our understanding of this will effect the way we live as Christians.
But, isn’t there really just one overacrching covenant of redemption? Never mind that Jeremiah said a New Covenant was coming that was not going to be like the old, and never mind that Christ said He was inaugurating a New Covenant in His blood or that Hebrews spells out plainly that thsoe who are in Christ are in a New Covenant that is described as Better…Grin.
Here is what is odd,
I was reading and listening to some fellas of the CT persuasion. Especially O Palmer Robertson. Now what strikes me as odd is that they do believe that the OC is not like the NC; however, the Covenant of Grace (which I do believe that God gave them a promise of grace, not a covenant but even if I agreed with that covenant which I could easily, I was still believe the two were “mutually exclusive” as Vetta so eloquently conveyed) has allowed them to trichotomize the OC making one an unchanging moral principle for ethics which can only be allowed if we have a Covenant of Grace.
I see rather a discontinuity and a continuity, not all bad for the OC.
I believe there is continuity T.C.R that would be in the shadow/fulfillment sense of the term though for example taking the Gospel of John and the picture/fullfilment that He uses to explain the Christ.
Where do you find continuity at?
I would say that the ceremonial aspects have been fulfilled in Messiah. But again, even the moral requirements, according to Paul (Romans 8:3-4).
Pauls says that the Law is “holy, righteous, and good” (Rom. 7:12). We must still view the Law in eschatological terms (Rom. 2:13). But now we can fulfill the Law in the power of the Spirit, the New Covenant difference.
T.C. R,
How would you deal with 2 Corinthians 3 and Hebrews 8-9 (both talks about the obscelence of the “law” Paul is pretty discriptive on what he means when he says “the tablet of stones” in 2 Corinthians 3).
Not only that but also in Romans 7:6 Paul says we were “released” from the law.
I would believe there is a new law called the “law of Christ”, because the law of Moses was powerless and was a law of condemnation.
Also wanted to add this link for conversation purposes. I usually avoid adding links from outside sources but I would agree with this. I usually do my own work but I didn’t want to reinvent the wheel. Let me know what you think.
http://www.biblicalstudies.com/bstudy/hermenutics/new_c_law.htm
T.C.R
I usually don’t include links but since I don’t want to recreate the wheel, here is something I would affirm in reference to our discussion
http://www.biblicalstudies.com/bstudy/hermenutics/new_c_law.htm
I love your list of 5. AMEN. This understanding is a revolution in our hearts — IT IS FINISHED!
Thank you Iris!
)