The Narrow Path Ministries

Should we equate the scripture with the old covenant or the old covenant with scripture?

Often the Old Covenant and the Old Testament are used interchangeably to refer to the first 39 books of the Bible.

Of course, the TaNaKh has an ordering different from the Christian Old Testament, though the content is pretty much the same.

When we think of the term old covenant, do we think of scripture or do we think of that which was between God and the nation of Israel, that is... the covenant and the Law associated with it?

What is the Old Covenant?

And, why do we call the first 39 books of the Bible the Old Covenant? All 39 books are scripture, but I don't understand why they are called the Old Covenant or Old Testament.

Can we say that the old covenant is the Torah or contained within the Torah or spoken of in the Torah?

Would anything beyond the Torah (the first five books of the Bible), or specific references to the old covenant within the Torah, be considered the old covenant or even simply God's Torah (God's instruction and teaching)?

Great questions. I think the Old Covenant is referred to as the Mosaic Law mostly, and it represents certain spiritual truths. Notice Paul said in Galatians that the promise to Abraham of all nations being blessed in his seed, came before the law. So we have a promise, than it's followed by a different kind of relationship than just God straight up promising somebody something. The Mosaic Law says "if you do this, if you fulfill such and such, if you love God with all the heart" then in response you receive the blessings and favor of God. We know that kind of a covenant is one of works not of grace, so why did God give it after the promise. God gave it to us as a lesson and an illustration, to point us back to grace. Because our fallen nature always gravitates towards a merit system with God. But all the Mosaic law was to teach us was our need for Christ and what Christ does for us, just as Paul calls it our "tutor" to lead us to Christ. Because the truth is, in all the Old Testament we see God being gracious and merciful—as Scripture says "if you marked iniquity, O Lord, who could stand?" If God really put all the Old Testament saints under a covenant of works, it would only produce condemnation. Yet Paul says something very interesting; he says the Jews "stumbled at the stumbling stone," which stone he then calls "a rock of offense." And what was this mistake the Jews made with their Tanakh and their synagogues and their religious leaders? Paul says "they sought a righteousness according to the Law and did not submit to the righteousness of Christ." Yet we see Old Testament saints that knew the grace and mercy of God was the only thing keeping them alive. As someone once said "David was a New Testament man," and truth be told all saints of all times have grace at the heart of their relationship with God, and grace is God doing for us what we cannot do for ourselves. So what of all these feasts and laws and rituals? Paul says these things were written to be a lesson for us, so that we learn spiritual truths.

dizerner wrote:Great questions. I think the Old Covenant is referred to as the Mosaic Law mostly, and it represents certain spiritual truths. Notice Paul said in Galatians that the promise to Abraham of all nations being blessed in his seed, came before the law. So we have a promise, than it's followed by a different kind of relationship than just God straight up promising somebody something. The Mosaic Law says "if you do this, if you fulfill such and such, if you love God with all the heart" then in response you receive the blessings and favor of God. We know that kind of a covenant is one of works not of grace, so why did God give it after the promise. God gave it to us as a lesson and an illustration, to point us back to grace. Because our fallen nature always gravitates towards a merit system with God. But all the Mosaic law was to teach us was our need for Christ and what Christ does for us, just as Paul calls it our "tutor" to lead us to Christ. Because the truth is, in all the Old Testament we see God being gracious and merciful—as Scripture says "if you marked iniquity, O Lord, who could stand?" If God really put all the Old Testament saints under a covenant of works, it would only produce condemnation. Yet Paul says something very interesting; he says the Jews "stumbled at the stumbling stone," which stone he then calls "a rock of offense." And what was this mistake the Jews made with their Tanakh and their synagogues and their religious leaders? Paul says "they sought a righteousness according to the Law and did not submit to the righteousness of Christ." Yet we see Old Testament saints that knew the grace and mercy of God was the only thing keeping them alive. As someone once said "David was a New Testament man," and truth be told all saints of all times have grace at the heart of their relationship with God, and grace is God doing for us what we cannot do for ourselves. So what of all these feasts and laws and rituals? Paul says these things were written to be a lesson for us, so that we learn spiritual truths.

Certainly in that we talk of the new covenant, we acknowledge the old covenant or the covenant that is now old, or meaning the first covenant.

Does the old covenant have any import for us today?

Do we even know what the old covenant is?

I have discovered much truth by studying the old covenant. It helped me with wrong understandings of the New Testament writings.

So, the Mosaic Law as you call it, does indeed point out sin. And it is associated with the old covenant. I don't believe it has been abolished, but I do want to understand what it means for me as a new covenant believer. That is, what I believe as a new covenant believer is important to me. We should leave no room for sin. But we should always be about grace.

There is time for personal introspection, and time for change in our lives as we minister to others.

Brother you can keep the feasts if you find it as a way to express your love for God, just don't ever try to be justified by your works.

Check out this old thread for a lot more talk on this subject: http://www.theos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4993

dizerner wrote:Brother you can keep the feasts if you find it as a way to express your love for God, just don't ever try to be justified by your works.

Check out this old thread for a lot more talk on this subject: http://www.theos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4993

Regarding the feasts or observances.

Colossians 2:16-17 NASB - 16 Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day-- 17 things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.

Regarding the thread, I enjoyed Steve's post the most.

As for myself, it is important to know when I am wrong and important to know that I am doing what is right. It's not about being right for the sake of being right. It is about not simply being wrong or condemned by the Law but living in the reality of the new covenant or knowing I am forgiven for all in which I have fallen short.

May what Paul said be true of us.

Philippians 3:9 NASB - 9 and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith,

Still, the place of the Law in the life of the believer is an important subject.

And whether the Law associated with the old covenant should be observed by the new covenant believer as well. I don't see any prohibition against observing old covenant Law. I don't know that we are to condemn others.

But I do know that somewhere there is a standard for righteousness.

I believe Jesus Christ kept the Law perfectly, and I believe that He taught it. So I believe it is for us. But we have a new covenant and we need to know what it means to live according to the new covenant. I don't think it means to become a transgressor.

What I admire most about the way Jesus and the apostles His disciples lived, is that they loved others even to the point of death. Did they stand for righteousness? Yes, I believe they did. I believe they did so in grace.

So is there a difference between the old covenant and the new covenant? And, since the old covenant was not abolished, should we abide by it today... or even the Law that was a part of the old covenant if we are to accept that the new covenant is the new covenant and not like the first covenant? In what way is it not like the old covenant? How is it better and how does a new covenant believer show that they are not transgressing the old covenant?

There are commands of God to be observed, even in the new covenant. And I believe the Spirit of God would never lead any person to transgress a command of God.

Meditate on this perhaps for some thoughts on it:

Cheap law weakens God's demand for perfection, and in doing so, breaths life into the old creature and his quest for a righteousness of his own making. And what I'm telling you is this: what doesn't kill him, makes him stronger. Lowering the bar lets the Old Adam peek into the Promised Land. It allows the flesh to survive by rebelling in a form of external piety. And – it's a perfect hiding place for the Old Being. We don't think to rebuke such a moral, well-mannered creature. But cheap law offers mercy in the wrong place. It offers mercy to those who are offended by the gift. It creates a people of great zeal, but they lack knowledge concerning the question "What Would Jesus Do?" Here is the costly answer: Jesus would do it all perfectly. And that's game over for you. — Tullian Tchividjian

dizerner wrote:Meditate on this perhaps for some thoughts on it:

Cheap law weakens God's demand for perfection, and in doing so, breaths life into the old creature and his quest for a righteousness of his own making. And what I'm telling you is this: what doesn't kill him, makes him stronger. Lowering the bar lets the Old Adam peek into the Promised Land. It allows the flesh to survive by rebelling in a form of external piety. And – it's a perfect hiding place for the Old Being. We don't think to rebuke such a moral, well-mannered creature. But cheap law offers mercy in the wrong place. It offers mercy to those who are offended by the gift. It creates a people of great zeal, but they lack knowledge concerning the question "What Would Jesus Do?" Here is the costly answer: Jesus would do it all perfectly. And that's game over for you. — Tullian Tchividjian

I know I wanted to talk about the old covenant. The New Testament scriptures are not necessarily the new covenant itself, though we learn about the new covenant from reading them, in addition to Jeremiah 31:31-34 NASB.

Jeremiah 31:31-34 NASB - 31 "Behold, days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them," declares the LORD. 33 "But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days," declares the LORD, "I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 "They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them," declares the LORD, "for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more."

So I can also ask, is the Law to be used for evangelism or for daily living as well?

1 Timothy 1:5-11 NASB - 5 But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6 For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion, 7 wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions. 8 But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9 realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers 10 and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, 11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.

If we learn about the old covenant, we do not learn only about what wretched sinners we are. But we can learn that the Law condemns us, it is or has a ministry of condemnation.

Do you believe there is a new standard for righteousness?

Do you believe God has always had the same standard, which we see perfectly in the person and life of Jesus Christ?

Do you believe God has always had the same standard, which we see perfectly in the person and life of Jesus Christ?

Exactly. As we put our faith that we are in him the law of the Spirit of Life sets us from the law of Sin into Death.

dizerner wrote:

Do you believe God has always had the same standard, which we see perfectly in the person and life of Jesus Christ?

Exactly. As we put our faith that we are in him the law of the Spirit of Life sets us from the law of Sin into Death.

It says the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus. And it says the law of sin and of death.

The two most basic options I have for what the law of sin and of death are is that it is either that the soul that sins shall die and Adam and Eve reaped the consequence of death to the sin they committed, or that it is the Law which prescribed the death penalty for those who break it.

To be sure, the Law is about love of God and love of our neighbor. So when I see that the wages of sin is death and that sin can be committed against ones own body that has lasting effects, I believe it is likely the first of these options that makes the most sense. Reading in context it is possible that I am wrong.

You are looking at Romans chapter 8, and I would focus on verses 1 through 4. I read the NASB.

JacobMartinMertens wrote:

dizerner wrote:

Do you believe God has always had the same standard, which we see perfectly in the person and life of Jesus Christ?

Exactly. As we put our faith that we are in him the law of the Spirit of Life sets us from the law of Sin into Death.

It says the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus. And it says the law of sin and of death.

The two most basic options I have for what the law of sin and of death are is that it is either that the soul that sins shall die and Adam and Eve reaped the consequence of death to the sin they committed, or that it is the Law which prescribed the death penalty for those who break it.

To be sure, the Law is about love of God and love of our neighbor. So when I see that the wages of sin is death and that sin can be committed against ones own body that has lasting effects, I believe it is likely the first of these options that makes the most sense. Reading in context it is possible that I am wrong.

You are looking at Romans chapter 8, and I would focus on verses 1 through 4. I read the NASB.

Well it's either you fulfill the law or Jesus does, I guess you'll have to take your pick.