| Home | Our Hope | |
| Bible Study |
|
January 20, 2019 |
| The Old Covenant - New Covenant Relationship | ||
Our God is a God of covenants. For his own reasons, he makes covenant agreements with mankind.
He has made many covenants and made many kinds of covenants. Sometimes the covenant is limited to an individual and his offspring; sometimes it applies to all mankind. Sometimes the covenant requires nothing of mankind; sometimes it requires more than most will be willing to give. Sometimes it requires the shedding of blood; other times not.
The particular interest of this study is to understand the transition from the Old Covenant made with Israel and the New Covenant made by Jesus. This study begins by understanding how covenants have worked in the past. Because the New Covenant has overlapped or superseded the Old Covenant, the focus is to determine how other covenants have worked when one overlapped or superseded another. Other covenants are studied to learn from them.
The goal is to define a rationale for determining what parts of the Old Covenant continue on into the New Covenant.
The two main theological systems in use for making this determination are expressed as:
These methods offer no rationale at all but are only rules created by men without any Biblical basis. Thus they give the appearance of cherry picking to achieve a predetermined result. Both also suffer from a dubious assumption - "The absence of evidence is evidence of absence." This is done by assuming that everything that is to be included or excluded is mentioned in the Bible.
There is also a less systematic approach that is commonly seen - "The OT laws I don't like are not in effect; the ones I like are." This is true cherry picking.
These methods also suffer from charging mankind, with all its desires and biases, with determining which things are included and excluded. The result is as expected - no agreement.
Our goal is to find a rationale that allows anyone to determine the parts that apply and do not apply.
Before we can talk about covenants, we need to understand how a covenant works. In this day, when most agreements are contracts, we also need to understand the difference between a contract and a covenant.
"With a contract, if one agreeing party does something in violation of the contract then it is considered broken. The whole contract becomes null and void. Basically the signers of a contract agree to hold up their ends as long as the other signatories hold up theirs too.
"With a covenant, both parties agree to hold up their ends regardless of whether the other party keeps their part of the agreement. A violation of a covenant by one party doesn't matter as far as the other party's responsibility to continue to do what they agreed to do."1
God makes covenants, not contracts. Sometimes he puts conditions on them or makes certain the other party understands and agrees to its obligation, but they are still covenants.
We can see they are covenants when the covenant includes unborn descendants. A contract requires the agreement of the parties to be bound by it. A good example of a covenant is the one God made with King David and his descendants, "You will always have a son on the throne as long as they follow me." This covenant specifies unborn sons and blesses them.
Another difference is that contracts automatically expire with the death of either party. A covenant expires with the death of the one who made the covenant. Whether the death of the other party causes the covenant to expire depends on the terms of the covenant. As we see with the covenant with King David above, it continued after the king's death.
God confirms this same understanding of a covenant when he speaks about his covenant with David.
If his sons forsake My law and do not walk in My judgments, 31 If they violate My statutes and do not keep My commandments, 32 then I will punish their transgression with the rod and their iniquity with stripes. 33 But I will not break off My lovingkindness from him, nor deal falsely in My faithfulness.
34 My covenant I will not violate, nor will I alter the utterance of My lips. 35 Once I have sworn by My holiness; I will not lie to David. (Psalms 89:30-35)
Note what he says. Violations of the terms by David's line will not break the covenant. Instead, there will be punishments.
God equates violating or changing his covenant, on his part, with lying and dealing falsely.
Psalm 111 echoes the same permanence of God's covenant with Israel.
He has given food to those who fear Him; he will remember His covenant forever. 6 He has made known to His people the power of His works, in giving them the heritage of the nations.
7 The works of His hands are truth and justice; All His precepts are sure. 8 They are upheld forever and ever; they are performed in truth and uprightness. 9 He has sent redemption to His people; He has ordained His covenant forever; Holy and awesome is His name. (Psalm 111:5-9)
The Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy saying:
But you should abide in those things that you have learned and of which you are assured, for you know from whom you have learned them, 15 And because from your childhood you were taught the Holy Scrolls which can make you wise unto the life in the faith of Yeshua the Messiah. 16 Every writing which is written by the Spirit is profitable for teaching, for correction, for direction and for a course in righteousness, 17 that the man of God will be perfect and perfected for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:14-17)
We accept that Paul is correct but we also know that Paul and other apostles showed that some parts of those holy scrolls no longer apply in the New Covenant. Therefore some parts are not useful for some of the purposes Paul lists. For example, discontinued parts can still be useful for teaching but not for a course in righteousness.
To divide and conquer the Old Testament, we look for ways to group the books. We find the first and most obvious division comes from Judaism, which breaks the Old Covenant books into the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. Our interest is primarily the Law, that course in righteousness Paul mentioned, but the Prophets and the Writings inform us about the Law. They certainly can't be ignored.
Unlike the Law, we can quickly show that the Prophets and the Writings continue into the New Covenant. This can be shown by Jesus' own words about Daniel. When the disciples ask Jesus about what will come in the future, he refers to Daniel the prophet as describing one of those end-time events, the placement of the abomination of desolation in the temple. That event did not occur while the temple stood after Jesus' time and couldn't have happened since then because there was no temple.
The continuation of prophecies through covenant periods can also be shown by what our own eyes have seen. As recent as the 1850s authors viewed the dispersion of Jews and could not believe that physical Israel would be restored. Therefore they treated those prophecies as figurative, allegorical instead of literal. We, however, have seen them fulfilled, at least in part. Therefore Daniel's prophecy was not terminated by the introduction of the New Covenant.
An abstract argument can also be made. Any prophecies given during the Old Covenant were given with three covenants in effect. The covenant with Noah has been in effect since the flood and the Abrahamic since his time. If a prophecy during Old Covenant times is tied to a covenant, to which of these three is the prophecy tied? The answer is that no covenant promised prophets or prophecies and there is no other reason to believe they are tied to a covenant.
Therefore, the remainder of this study will focus on the Law. The Prophets and Writings will be used to inform us about the Law, both in Old Covenant and New Covenant times.
The first covenant God established is also the one most different from the others. The marital covenant is not passed down through generations. It stands by itself as an open covenant that mankind can enter into if they agree to its terms.
The marital covenant also has no promises attached to it. Therefore it serves more as the definition of a kind of relationship that allows the closeness of sexual love.
It can be argued that this wasn't a covenant but instead just a set of curses, but it looks like a covenant. Also, who says that a covenant must have happy smiling promises.
There was a curse on Eve and all women, that they would bear children with pain. There was a curse on Adam and all men, that they would struggle to get food from the ground. There was a curse on both and on all mankind that death would be their end.
When Noah is born, he is named prophetically.
Now he called his name Noah, saying, "This one will give us rest from our work and from the toil of our hands arising from the ground which the Lord has cursed." (Genesis 5:29)
This covenant is rare in that it is partly completed. Noah does bring rest for mankind, though maybe not in the way his father expected. The flood destroys the ground and therefore that curse is removed.
The covenant with Noah is a more typical covenant. It is a generational covenant that begins with Noah and therefore applies to all people for all time. It contains a promise, but it isn't a deliverable promise that would cause the covenant to be completed. Instead the promise is a negative, "I will not", which keeps the covenant in force at least until God destroys the earth in some other way. Therefore it is still in effect.
The Noahide covenant contains laws of conduct for mankind and Jewish scholars have derived the 7 Noahide laws from what God says. The covenant does not specify conditions or terms for mankind. Therefore violation of the laws does not result in a breach of the covenant. Despite mankind not following those laws God hasn't seen fit to toss out the promise and drown us.
Before this covenant, which came after the flood, people only ate plants. Even so God spoke to Noah about the numbers of clean and unclean animals to be brought aboard the ark. The animals were not clean or unclean to Noah - they weren't food at all. They were clean and unclean to God as his food - as sacrifices.
The covenant made with David contains a promise, someone from your line will always sit on the throne, but the promise is ongoing and therefore never completely deliverable (until time stops, I suppose). Therefore the covenant can't be completed by fulfillment and it is still in effect.
That covenant does have terms though and they are clearly conditions for the fulfillment of the promise. God proves to be very lenient in determining a breach, though, so the promise survives until Jesus comes, who is king forever.
The promises of this covenant were a list of conditional blessings, a larger list of conditional curses, and the land. The curses included being thrown out of the land. Israel is currently returning from its second bout with the curses.
OT prophecy and NT prophecy both support the idea that Israel would return to the land, as they have in part. This confirms that the covenant is still in place.
The covenant was made with all of the Israelites who were at Mount Sinai that day and with all their descendants. The covenant is really a continuation of the covenant made with Abraham and repeated with Isaac and Jacob. For the purpose of this study we'll name this covenant Judaism or the Old Covenant.
Although it is sometimes called the Mosaic covenant it was not made with Moses directly, though it included him. His role in it was that of mediator, for as long as he lived.
Gentiles (Non-Israelites) could enter into the covenant as well. This was implemented as a training session which was needed to ensure they understood the law. At the completion of the training they became new men. Whatever they had been before was gone and they had become one of God's people.
The covenant inherited circumcision of the male foreskin from the covenant God had made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. From early on, Moses made it clear that the physical circumcision was symbolic of a spiritual circumcision. The spiritual meaning is never made perfectly clear but is something like removing anything that separates you from God.
The initial admittance into the covenant occurred at Mount Sinai. In preparation for that event, every man took on the sign of the covenant.
God had wanted to put the Israelites through a special training session that would bring them up to speed with the requirements of the covenant, so they would not sin. When the training began they thought their brains would explode and they asked God to train Moses who would explain it to them.
This necessity of being up-to-speed is a characteristic of this covenant. If a person entered the covenant without that knowledge he could be down a ram or a goat and two birds after the first day.
People who were not from Jacob (Gentiles) could also be admitted.
After the initial admittance, all further admittance was done by taking the sign and learning the law. The children of the followers of Judaism were circumcised into the covenant when they were 8 days old. They were raised and trained by their parents as they grew. Circumcision was also required for any adults who joined the covenant.
The Bible doesn't set a specific age of accountability, at which an individual becomes accountable under the law, but the Jews decided that 13 would be that age. In Jesus' time the practice was to bring the child to Jerusalem at age 12 to be questioned by the priests to determine if his knowledge was sufficient.
This idea continues into our day as the Bar Mitzvah, which means "Son of the Law" which we would call "Follower or Student of the Law". In modern times (circa 1922) this was extended to girls as a Bat Mitzvah "Daughter of the Law."
Adult Gentiles who entered into the covenant were immediately accountable. This was the reason for the training they received in the law.
The covenant with Israel is a perpetual (unending) covenant. Some might disagree but the evidence is pretty clear. It specifies that breaches of the conditions will be dealt with through curses, including being thrown out of the land. It also makes allowance for the party who breached to be restored to the covenant.
It is very much like a marital covenant and God, through his prophets, likens it that way. God also lives out his own words on marriage, "I hate divorce" (Malachi 2:16), by restoring Israel despite the promiscuity and unfaithfulness.
The nature of this covenant is similar to some earlier covenants. It was made with a group of people and was therefore much more a corporate covenant than an individual covenant. Generally God did not immediately punish an individual for his sinful actions. Instead the problem would be allowed to grow like a cancer within the body until it became a corporate level problem. Then God would strike at large numbers of the people.
The main exception to this was the priests, who were closer to God, better trained, and more directly accountable.
This doesn't mean that God was not interested in the individual. Individuals would face the same judgment after death as a person in any other covenant, but God's focus for this covenant was on purifying a people for his earthly work.
This covenant also contained laws, an extensive list of them. Being both a corporate and individual covenant there were two ways to breach the covenant. Having enough people with a heart that rejects obedience to the laws was a breach of the corporate conditions of the covenant. That generally brought on temporal punishment. Individually, having a heart that rejects obedience to the law is a breach that generally brought on a punishment after death.
The extent of the laws is unprecedented among covenants. They regulate some of the smallest aspects of life, such as holidays, personal appearance, clothing fabrics, foods, property, inheritance, and on and on. In this it again reveals itself to be a corporate covenant. More than that though, it shapes an entire society, giving it the structure of a kingdom.
At the top is the king, God, whose authority to regulate and enforce is unfettered. Below that are his ministers and intermediaries (Chief Priest, priests, and Levites). Below that are the tribes with their heads. Among them are kinsmen-redeemers who are given special functions in society. Lastly there is the common man.
The structure was possible, and possibly necessary, because of the promise of land, which produced a geographically distinct people. It was also a familiar structure that the people would have known from Egypt and from the surrounding nations.
The law is seen by the Rabbis as being organized into two groups, essentially the Ten Commandments and everything else, for a total of 613 commandments. The Ten Commandments are seen as being the foundation for the others but not something distinct from them. In this holistic view, the law is not seen as 10 + 603.
The Ten Commandments are organized into two tablets according to Deuteronomy 6:5 ("Love Yahweh your God …") and Leviticus 19:18 ("Love your neighbor as yourself"), leaving 5 commandments on each tablet.
Christians have sought to organize the 603 other commandments into groups but Judaism does not accept that the Bible provides a basis for such distinctions.
Recall that Noahide Law was God's law for mankind until this covenant began. Because this covenant was directed to a particular people, a wall was created within mankind. On one side were God's chosen people and this covenant. On the other side were the rest of mankind, who were still under the Noahide covenant.
An interesting change happens with food. Clean and unclean animals had only referred to God's table until this covenant. Now God restricts the people in this covenant to eating only the food acceptable to him.
Judaism came about through two covenants. The law of the first covenant was inscribed on the throne-stone tablets by the finger of God. Before "the ink was dry" the Israelites had broken the law. Moses destroyed the tablets on seeing the golden calf they had setup and so that covenant was done.
After that, in Exodus 34:10, God says. "Behold, I am going to make a covenant …" and he creates a new covenant. It is not a renewal of the previous covenant as some have imagined. It contains a new clause, "… it is a fearful thing that I am going to perform with you." God will be using them to demonstrate his power and glory. This is probably a reference to the punishments he will inflict on them for their future disobedience.
Because a covenant cannot be altered and because of this new clause, a new covenant was required.
That this covenant is new is also evident in the remainder of Exodus 34 as God does what we would call inclusion-by-reference. He brings the various aspects of the throne-stone covenant into the limestone2 covenant, by referring to words from each of them.
Salvation under the covenant was the same as at any other time, by faith in God and his word. What is unique to this covenant is a formalized sacrificial system and as part of that, sacrifices for sin. At earlier times sacrifices were ad-hoc with the only restriction being the use of clean animals. Sacrifices had been burnt offerings, gifts to God, but not for sin. These sacrifices had existed from at least the time of Cain and Abel.
Under this covenant, burnt offerings continued on and some similar sacrifices (peace offerings and food and drink offerings) were added. These were all gifts to God. The new component in the sacrifices for this covenant was the sin offering. God promised that if this sacrifice was done he would forgive their unintentional sins. The sacrifice, however, had no power to atone for sin (Hebrews 10:4). Instead it served as:
Despite being symbolic in purpose, the sacrifice for sin was required for sin to be forgiven.
The temple was the geographic center for the covenant. While tabernacles existed in every town of any size, they were secondary. Three times a year the people were required to make their best effort to go to the temple for the feast days. The sacrifices could not be performed anywhere else.
The temple was also the earthly home for God.
Many people believe this covenant was terminated, either by the death of its promised Messiah or the beginning of the New Covenant. There isn't any Biblical reason to believe that, however. The idea is often based on a misunderstanding between a covenant and a contract.
In fact the Bible seems fairly clear that the covenant is still open.
My brethren, I speak as among men, that a man does not reject or change anything in a man's covenant which has been confirmed. 16 But the promise was promised to Abraham and to his seed, and he did not say to him, "To your seeds", as to many, but, "To your seed", as of one, who is the Messiah. 17 But I say this: The Covenant which was confirmed from the first by God in the Messiah, the Law (Torah) which was 430 years afterward, cannot cast off and cancel the promise. (Galatians 3:15-17)
Behold, I Paul say to you that if you will be circumcised, the Messiah profits you nothing. 3 But I testify again to every person who is circumcised, that he is obligated to observe all of the Law (Torah). 4 You have been destroyed from the Messiah, those of you who are justified by that in the Law (Torah), and you have fallen from grace. (Galatians 5:2-4)
The first set of verses show that the Abrahamic Covenant was not terminated by the Old Covenant. Therefore there is no reason to think any covenant terminates a previous covenant.
The second set of verses shows Paul telling them, if they want to go back to the Old Covenant they need to observe all the law. If he believed the Old Covenant was closed he would not have said that.
It is not in the nature of God to terminate a covenant either. He knows everything that will happen before the covenant is offered.
The new covenant lacks the kind of specificity we would like to see and that is seen in other covenants. That is the reason for this study.
The promise of this covenant is the Holy Spirit residing within each believer. The failure of the previous covenant had been due to the evil nature of mankind. Here, the Holy Spirit is a new internal voice that counteracts the voices from that human nature.
In the Old Covenant the Holy Spirit was generally given only to prophets and kings. Now he was available to everyone.
The Holy Spirit is of course Holy, being God, but that isn't the meaning of "Holy Spirit". The better name would be "Spirit that leads us to Holiness," but that is a bit wordy. That is his mission however.
The Holy Spirit is able to lead each person on the best path to holiness, a path that is individualized to the person's characteristics and environment.
That lack of specificity in this covenant begins with defining the other party to this covenant. It is also an open covenant for anyone to join if they accept the terms.
That makes this covenant resemble the marital covenant which was not made with a particular party but stands as an open covenant.
This covenant is even more like the marital covenant than the covenant with Israel. Unlike the Old Covenant it was not made with a specific biological people. Instead it was open to all peoples.
A defining characteristic results from this. With the Old Covenant, a family would be expected to all be Jews or not. Under this covenant some family members could be and others not.
The requirement for admittance to this covenant is accepting Jesus' blood as atonement and his body as sacrifice for sin.
In this covenant Jesus' self-sacrifice became a no-cost (to us) sacrifice for sin. Under the old covenant a man could sin himself into the poor house. Training was necessary to avoid this. Under this covenant, therefore, a distinct change became possible. A person could enter the covenant while knowing virtually nothing of its laws.
This does result in a problem within the body as some people have very little understanding and others have greater. It is easy to become critical of those with little understanding. This is dealt with by the Apostle Paul by showing that we are all the servants of one master.
Who are you to judge a Servant who is not yours? For if he stands, he stands to his Master, and if he falls, he falls to his Master, for it is appointed to his Master to be able to establish him. (Romans 14:4)
This variability of understanding results in incongruous situations with older people who are spiritually young, young who are more mature than expected, and older people who started young but have failed to mature. This presents a problem when discipling the people, especially in a smaller church.
Given that the Old Covenant inherited circumcision from the Abrahamic covenant, it would seem obvious that the New Covenant would also - but it didn't. This caused trouble in the earliest days of the covenant. Moses had said God wanted a heart that was circumcised, a spiritual circumcision, but the physical circumcision was still required. In the New Covenant circumcision of the heart is required but the physical circumcision is not a prerequisite or requirement of the covenant.
The truth of that is clear; the reasoning behind it is not. A commonly seen incorrect reason is that "we have been freed from the law." The same people will then contradict themselves by saying that we must keep the Ten Commandments … except the 4th. The truth is they mean "we have been freed from the laws we don't like."
Circumcision was discussed in the First Council of Jerusalem and recorded in Acts 15. The council's decision is based on empirical evidence instead of fundamental principles.
If we can understand the fundamental principle behind this change, it may lead us to a rationale for determining which OT laws apply in the NT. It is also interesting that they revert to Noahide Law.
This covenant does not have a sign. Some have said that Communion or Baptism are that sign however Communion is just a simplified Passover and Baptism was done in the temple (in living water) long before John the Baptist began his work in the Jordan river. They were not covenant signs in the Old Covenant and aren't in this covenant either.
The age of accountability still exists in this covenant as a framework for understanding and dealing with the death of children. Unlike the Old Covenant Rabbis, no one in this covenant has set a particular age for that.
Also, zero-cost atonement eliminates the need to set an age or to ensure the young or the adults have the understanding needed to enter the covenant.
The nature of this covenant is very individualistic. It is between an individual and God and is not a corporate covenant. Gone are the days when God would destroy a wide swath of his people. Despite this nature we are advised to congregate as a community for our own benefit.
Where the Old Covenant was hierarchical with many layers and with priests as intermediaries, this covenant is essentially flat. At the top there is God and at the next level down there is man.
There are no intermediaries or ministers, in the sense of government functionaries, though there is one denomination that has tried to insert itself into that role. In the Old Covenant people at higher levels were required to bring a greater sacrifice for sin, a ram or a bull instead of a sheep or goat. These distinctions are wiped away by the one-time sacrifice for all in this covenant.
There is a structure of apostles, prophets, ministers, and others, the top levels of which are effectively inoperable at the time. These are not regulatory though but are a hierarchy of servants to the people.
The downside to this reduced hierarchy is that there are no reliable earthly sources for interpretation. Within each branch of theology, individuals study and put themselves out as men of God. The disagreements between them show the problem.
This covenant also has laws. A heart that rejects them is considered a breach of the covenant and generally results in punishment after death as opposed to during life.
Unlike the earlier covenant those laws are not spelled out in detail. Because of this and because the covenant with Israel is the progenitor to the new covenant and because the new covenant comes into place by the death of Jesus, who was of Israel and that covenant, it is difficult to know exactly what the laws are for the new covenant.
The law is seen as being organized into three groups:
The Love of God doesn't seem like a law but it really is. If we could understand his love we would want to be like him. His love calls out to us to also love.
We don't understand his love, however, and therefore it was necessary for us to have help. At first this came in the form of a conscience that was created in man, but a conscience can become numb. Then it came as a written law, to always be effective, but the desires of our bodies overpowered it. In our time it has come as the spirit of God within us, but we still need to listen to him.
The love of God is seen as the foundation, the Ten Commandments are seen as being built on that, and then whatever is left is built on that. Therefore the Ten Commandments can be used to better understand the others and the love of God can be used to better understand the Ten.
We see that this hierarchy of the law was true in the Old Covenant as well, though it doesn't appear the people understood it. When Jesus tells the parable about the Good Samaritan he rebukes various groups of Jews for not helping the injured man. They were living according to the lower precedence laws and forgetting that the higher precedence law of loving your neighbor also applied.
The Ten Commandments are organized into two tablets according to Deuteronomy 6:5 ("Love Yahweh your God …") and Leviticus 19:18 ("Love your neighbor as yourself"). Christians have ignored the Jewish grouping of the laws onto the tablets, leaving 4 or 5 commandments on the first tablet and 5 or 6 on the other, depending on the person. There is also no agreement on the numbering of the commandments or their content. The Sabbath commandment is also interpreted in many ways, mostly to dispose of it. It can be said that most Christians follow all 9 of the 10 commandments.
Despite the above understanding of the Ten Commandments, the law in this covenant is not written on tablets of stone. On Pentecost (Feast of Weeks) the Holy Spirit was given to all who believed in Jesus. The Holy Spirit was given on Pentecost to show that the law was being given as well. The Feast of Weeks marked the giving of the law at Mount Sinai.
Jeremiah wrote about this event.
"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." (Jeremiah 31:33)
Note that God says "I will put My law." The law of the Holy Spirit is not a new law but God's pre-existing law. The context of this passage bears this out as this promise comes after registering the complaint that Israel had broken the covenant.
The law is no different but the mode of the law is completely different. Instead of bringing in the law as head knowledge and trying to apply it, the Holy Spirit, if we will listen, will show us how to apply it.
The law of the Old Covenant is not gone however. It still pronounces death on the unbelievers. For believers, though, it does not. The new mode of the Holy Spirit frees us from sin. Paul describes it this way.
And now, my brethren, you also have died to the Law (Torah) with the body of the Messiah that you would be for another, the one who arose from the dead, that you would yield fruit to God. […] 6 But now we have been exempted from the Law (Torah), and we are dead to that which had controlled us, so that we shall serve from now on in the newness of the Spirit and not in the Old Order Scriptures. (Romans 7:6)
Because the law is no different, we see Paul and other apostles teaching the Ten Commandments. That might seem unnecessary but it serves the same purpose as a school. The education is a fast way to learn what could be learned by ourselves over time.
We need to avoid the trap of living for the written law, though, instead of living by the Holy Spirit.
This covenant came into effect in pieces over a short period of time. It was created by the sacrificial death of Jesus, confirmed by his resurrection three days later, and the promise was given 50 days after that.
The atonement system in the New Covenant is completely different. The tearing of the temple curtain when Jesus died symbolized both the destruction of his body and the end of the separation of man and God. No longer was a temple necessary, with its priests to act as intermediaries.
In its place is a Great High Priest (Hebrews 7), Jesus, whose perfect life and blood serve as the atonement for all sin. This atonement is available to all who believe in him.
Gone are the animal sacrifices that were symbolic but required but not able to purge sin. These are replaced by the sacrifice that God always wanted from man, the sacrifice of his will and life.
This priest is also the mediator of the covenant, a mediator who is both God and man, a man who has lived with men and can relate to them.
The Old Covenant's atonement system only applied to unintentional sins. This showed that it was incomplete and hinted that there was a greater atonement to come. If there was no atonement for intentional sin then no one would be left after judgment day.
Ezekiel talks about how it was in the Old Covenant.
"Cast away from you all your transgressions [law breaking] which you have committed and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel? 32 For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies," declares the Lord God. "Therefore, repent and live." (Ezekiel 18:31-32)
Here and in other places in Ezekiel 18, God is saying it was possible to repent of intentional sins, for which there was no sacrifice, and still have everlasting life. This was possible because there would someday be an atonement for those sins as well.
The one-time sacrificial death of Jesus provided an atonement that covered all sins.
Therefore, know brothers, that by this one, the forgiveness of sins is preached to you. 39 And all who believe in this one are justified of all things from which you cannot be justified by the Law (Torah) of Moses. (Acts 13:38,39)
Therefore Jesus' sacrifice atones for the faithful in the past who had committed intentional sins as well as those in Jesus time and those in our time.
There is no geographic center point for this covenant. There is also no priestly order. Each of us has become the priest of our own temple.
This new concept of priest and temple needs to be explored further to determine if it is a practical reality or only a figurative illustration.
There is another layer within the law. In most circumstances it's not worth mentioning, but for this study it is.
Earlier we discussed the Christian break down of the law into three layers. There are actually four:
In Christendom, the Great Sabbaths are largely not understood as a layer above the Ten Commandments. If they are considered at all, they are considered to be in the last layer. The general feeling is that they died with the Old Covenant.
As discussed we know these days are symbolic of future days. It isn't clear what the Jews understood about those events prior to Jesus. Jews of our time do have a very good understanding of the events behind the Fall feasts. That understanding is only muddled by their misunderstandings about the Messiah.
The Great Sabbaths are listed in Leviticus 23 and specifically described as "Yahweh's appointed times" and "My appointed times." They are not Israel's appointed times, but God's. Therefore there is no reason to think they are tied to Israel or to the Old Covenant.
These are the times that God has appointed for himself to accomplish certain things. In total these feast days map out God's plan for salvation. Therefore they are prophetic in the sense that they tell us about future events. In the First Coming we saw the Spring feasts fulfilled. We expect the Fall feasts to be fulfilled in the Second Coming.
It's important to understand the layout of this chapter in Leviticus. It begins with God's statements about these being his appointed times. Then he refers to the weekly Sabbath. Then, in verse 4, he restates "These are the appointed times of Yahweh" and then describes the feasts that are associated with and describe the appointed times."
The purpose behind this structure is to connect the weekly Sabbath to the Great Sabbaths and to show that it is not a Great Sabbath. The thing they have in common is that they are all days of rest. This connection between them also makes them inseparable. One can't be had without the other. The reasons that might be used to reject one would also reject the other.
From looking at the law itself, we can see that the Great Sabbaths are a separate and superior level in the law. The weekly Sabbath and the Great Sabbaths were all feast days, except one. A feast day is a day when a person can eat and drink; a fast day is the opposite. The Great Sabbath, Yom Kippor, is a fast day. God refers to it as the holiest day on his calendar because it celebrates the day of our final atonement.
Yom Kippor has a specific date on the Jewish calendar but the weekly Sabbath can land on any day of the calendar. Therefore, once every seven years on average, they land on the same day - a feast day and a fast day on the same day. God spells out how this is to be handled - Yom Kippor wins, it's a fast day.
Therefore, Yom Kippor takes precedence over the weekly Sabbath and, because Yom Kippor is part of the appointed days, a separate group from the weekly Sabbaths, we see the appointed days are a higher law.
The Jews of Jesus time understood the appointed days as superior Sabbaths. This can be seen from John 19:31, which is the source of the Great Sabbath terminology used here.
What makes the appointed days different is that they cannot be observed completely at present. Every one of them requires a functioning temple in Jerusalem. They remain though, as Paul says, useful for teaching.
Our interest here is in the Old Covenant and New Covenant particularly and covenants like them that overlap, supersede, or replace earlier covenants or covenants that are completed by delivery of the promise.
The Noahide covenant is one of those and an especially interesting case. We know the covenant is still in effect but its laws are overlapped by the laws of the Old Covenant with Israel. When the covenant with Israel came into effect, the Noahide laws were overridden, but only for those people in that covenant. They remained in place for everyone else.
Much later when the covenant made by Jesus came into effect, those who entered into it came under its terms. The Old Covenant is described in the New Testament with terms like fading, ceasing, and less glorious (2 Corinthians 3:7-14, Hebrews 8:13). These all describe a process that occurs over time. Therefore there is no reason to believe that the Old Covenant was terminated. Instead it is now upstaged by a better covenant with better promises (Hebrews 7:22,8:6). Why would you choose the Old Covenant when the New Covenant is the other choice? Therefore Hebrews 8 states the expectation that it is near destruction, meaning when everyone has left it, it will have been destroyed.
Whether the Old Covenant is still in effect has become only an academic point. The temple has been gone since shortly after the New Covenant began and that state has continued through to this time. Without the temple, most of the Old Covenant can't function. Being a covenant, the promises remain, both blessings and curses.
As discussed earlier, those who have chosen to be under the New Covenant find that the Noahide covenant still remains as the minimum law requirement. This gives us more evidence about the interaction of overlapping covenants.
There are so many covenants that overlap but are obviously still in effect: the marriage covenant, Noahide covenant, Abrahamic covenant, messianic covenant with David, and more. In fact there is no case where it can be clearly shown that God abandoned a covenant. Even with the first and second Old Covenants discussed above, the second wasn't truly new but was the first covenant brought into the second by reference.
It makes sense that God would treat covenants this way. If he abandoned a covenant he had made, it could be said of him that he knew the future and therefore entered into the covenant in bad faith, knowing he wouldn't have to adhere to the terms. In effect he took advantage of the other party who does not know the future.
We've studied many covenants and understand better how covenants work. We've especially focused on the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. We've seen the Old Covenant transitions to the New Covenant. In many ways they are very similar but the coming of the Messiah changes critical aspects.
The next step is to begin with the breakdown of the law we've discussed and determine how each section changes.
One thing has shown itself over and over as we've studied these covenants. Some Old Covenant laws have a physical component and a spiritual component. Even some Noahide laws had this.
These laws aren't like the observances though. With the observances, the physical component is a prophetic description of a future event. For example, Passover prophetically described the Messiah's death and how he would be a sacrificial lamb, chosen by his people, his atoning blood.
These laws are also not like the holy things in the tabernacle and temple. With these things, they were physical representations of things in Heaven. For example, the Ark of the Covenant represented who the Messiah would be, priest, bread of life, and the fulfillment of the law.
These laws are different. With these the purpose seems to be to get people to think about how God sees things. The physical component is more a symbolic reference, parallel, simile, or example of the spiritual component. For example, the food laws were warnings to be careful about what spiritual things you take into yourself.
The physical component does not spring from the spiritual component and does not support the spiritual component. It can be removed without causing trouble for the spiritual component.
The focus of the following analysis of the Old Covenant to New Covenant changes will be in identifying where this particular physical / spiritual paradigm is being used.
God does not change and so his love for us does not waver.
There is no evidence in the Love of God of a two layered, physical / spiritual structure that could be separated. We would not expect to find that because we do not expect to see a change here.
There is clear evidence here of a two layered structure. But each feast day is clearly an observance of a future event. Therefore they are not symbolic references or examples and there is no reason to believe that these have changed.
Without the physical we wouldn't know the spiritual. Therefore the physical and the spiritual cannot be separated. If they were separable, the physical could be discarded and there would be an unexpected change.
There is another reason not to expect a change. If the weekly Sabbath persists then the Great Sabbaths must persist because of their tie to it.
There is also prophecy describing a future time when these will be in effect. In our time we think of that as a prophecy of restoration of those Sabbaths but that is a matter of perspective from a church that has thrown them away.
As mentioned earlier, though these days persist, they are inoperable because they rely on the presence of a temple. That doesn't mean they can't be observed at all.
The Jewish observance of Passover included many things and had always include wine and bread. Through his request that we drink the wine and eat the bread, Jesus shows us how to keep the Feast of Passover in this time.
The early church fathers such as Polycarp and Polycrates saw no difference between the simplified bread and wine and the full Passover. Polycarp insisted that the Apostles had kept the day of Passover. Later, Polycrates insisted that all the church fathers down to him had done the same. For them the shortened observance was equivalent. This also indicates the Great Sabbaths have not changed.
Also, we see the Apostles making a point of attending other feast days in Jerusalem, so they didn't see them as discontinued. Therefore this same pattern set by Jesus can be applied to the other feast days, observing all that can be observed by removing the parts that call for a temple.
No one accepts that the Ten Commandments have changed or been done away with. There is no reason to believe they have changed.
Some have argued that Jesus extended the depth and breadth of the Ten Commandments in his teaching. That isn't true or possible. Hillel, the highly esteemed Rabbi of Jesus' time, understood all of what Jesus taught on the Ten Commandments. What Jesus taught can be derived from the commandments directly.
It's important to understand Jesus was under the law and could not add to, or take away from the law.
The 4th commandment has that same two layered structure that is seen in the Great Sabbaths, but like them the weekly Sabbath observes an event and isn't a symbolic representation or example. Therefore there is no reason to believe the weekly Sabbath can be separated and discarded.
Christendom has created many reasons, though, why the 4th commandment no longer applies. There are enough reasons that each individual is able to find a reason that suits. None of them are valid though.
Additional support comes from the Bible, where Hebrews 3-4 clearly explains why the Sabbath observance continues on.
Therefore we can say that these commandments are entirely spiritual. The apostle Paul says the same thing when he says, "we know the law is spiritual …"
As we look at these commandments, most of them obviously have both physical and spiritual components. Others are known to people who have done more study. For other laws we see only a physical side, but that is likely due to a lack of understanding. It's easy to accept that they have a spiritual component as well.
Also the physical components, where we understand them, have that characteristic of a symbolic reference whose purpose is to cause us to think deeply about God's word. Many times, God said to his people they should think about them and talk about them.
It appears then that this entire set of commandments have a physical component that serves the purpose of causing the people to think about them to get to the spiritual component. Therefore the physical component is only a hint at the spiritual component which can function without it. Therefore the physical component is not necessary.
The expression "throwing away the physical" doesn't convey the full truth though. Our relationship to the physical component has changed from covenantal to educational. There is still much to learn from the physical. For example, our understanding of disease informs us that there are real health risks associated with pork and shellfish. In turn we understand that God knew this when he created those laws long before people understood disease.
The laws of the Old Covenant had many purposes. As we mentioned before, one of God's purposes was to set up a geographic kingdom that was walled off from the rest of the world. With the New Covenant, that kingdom no longer exists and the wall has been torn down. With that change we expect a change in the laws that created the wall.
That is what we've seen so far. God's Love, as a law, did not create that wall, and neither did the Feast Days or the Ten commandments. It was the laws of society, the food laws, ceremonial laws, etc. that separated Jew from Gentile.
Our hypothesis is this: the spiritual aspect of the law has not changed. For only the part of the law we've called The Other Commandments, the physical component is no longer covenantal.
It's easy to say that change happened but what we've really desired from this study is the why. What is the causative agent that makes it happen or possible.
The answer is - the Holy Spirit within us. The appearance of the Holy Spirit in the New Covenant eliminates the need for the physical hints about spiritual matters. He serves in that capacity of teacher. He eliminates the concern about impurity because he purifies.
This shouldn't surprise us. It was foretold in the symbolism of the tabernacle.
The outer court symbolizes the outer man and his need for washing to become pure, animal sacrifices for sin. It's 3rd element is an inner place, into which only priests could enter. The Old Covenant addressed these things.
The inner court, is part of that inner place. It symbolizes the mind of man. In the New Covenant the three things we find here are the Menorah, representing the Holy Spirit, the loaves of bread, representing the Word of God, and the incense altar, representing prayers.
These things also take care of the purification of the outer man, as Jesus was also both the water and the blood that purified.
There is also the Holy of Holies. Just as the inner court showed a new covenant we expect a new covenant to reach this stage. Just as the people in the Old Covenant had little understanding of what the New Covenant would bring, we have little what this new covenant will bring.
The three elements that we find there are embodied in the Ark of the Covenant, the Throne of God, the atonement cover, and the law. These represented who Jesus would be. Other verses tell us that we will be like him, but the fullness of that has not been revealed … yet.
Therefore the physical / spiritual nature of these commandments was also a picture of the people of that time who did not have the Holy Spirit - they had to go through the physical in order to get to the spiritual.
We can also see the Holy Spirit's purification through the absence of the Second Passover in the New Testament. Second Passover was given by God as a day for people who were ceremonially impure on Passover to observe Passover. It receives no mention at all in the New Testament and there is no mention of a need to deal with ceremonial impurity at Passover. Second Passover is not needed in the New Covenant because the Holy Spirit keeps us ceremonially pure.
In the following section we will test this hypothesis by looking at what Jesus and the Apostles taught about specific Old Testament laws.
To test the hypothesis we will look at two kinds of verses, where:
Jesus lived under the Old Covenant and taught people who were also under that covenant. One of his purposes was to restore the people to the Old Covenant. He could not teach against it but he could, and sometimes did, teach about the changes that would come in the New Covenant. So we will look at Jesus teaching the Old Covenant and the apostles teaching the New Covenant.
And Yeshua called to all the crowds, and he said to them, "Hear me all of you and understand. 15 There is nothing outside of a man that enters into him that can defile him; the thing that proceeds from him, that is what defiles the man. 16 Whoever has an ear to hear, let him hear."
But when Yeshua entered the house from the crowds, his disciples asked him about that parable. 18 He said to them, "Are you also stupid? Do you not know that nothing entering from outside a man can defile him? 19 Because it does not enter his heart, but his belly, and is discharged by excretion, which purifies all foods."
"But the thing that proceeds from a man, that defiles the man. 21 For from within the heart of the children of men proceed evil ideas, adultery, fornication, theft, murder. 22 Greed, wickedness, deceit, harlotry, an evil eye, blasphemy, boasting, senselessness. 23 All these evils proceed from within and defile a man." (Mark 7:14-23)
Roughly half of the translations available on BibleHub add a novel phrase like "(In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)" which does not appear in any Greek or Aramaic manuscript. As stated before, Jesus cannot change the law.
So what is Jesus saying here? He is showing the depth of meaning of the food laws. In the physical realm, eating unclean food made a person unclean until sunset. It was an uncleanness that passed automatically. Jesus refers to it entering the stomach and later being excreted. It was temporary. He also says something to the effect of "pork in, not pork out". The stomach has purified it. So, uncleanness from foods is temporary and not terminal.
That doesn't mean it was now acceptable for them to eat pork. That covenant required them not to eat certain foods. It also specified how they were to handle situations where these foods were touched or eaten.
In the spiritual realm, the story is different. Jesus says the unclean food does not enter the heart. We know that other things do enter the heart, unclean words, images and ideas. When these come out of a man, Jesus says, then they defile him. This defilement is not temporary and is possibly terminal.
We have some control over the entry of those unclean words, images and ideas, but not as much as we would like. We walk around in a world that inundates us with them. What uncleanness we don't get from the world, our sinful nature brings into us. Once in us, we wrestle with it. God said to Cain, "you must overcome". Unfortunately, he allowed it to come out.
Jesus also says "Whoever has an ear to hear, let him hear" which means they should think about this. He is saying something deep. He uses the word "defilement", which usually referred to the domain of clean and unclean, to link to the domain of holy and common. By doing that he shows the connection between the two, that one is a physical representation of the other, which is spiritual.
Jesus contrasts the unclean that comes out clean with the evil that comes out defiling. His point in all of this is: the food laws contain a deeper message for you about being careful about the spiritual food you eat and about serious defilement.
Jesus' statement also hints at the coming covenant, when he says "which purifies all foods". He is saying the body purifies the impure. Although this is said to the disciples, he doesn't explain it to them. He implies: if the body purifies the impure, how much more will the Holy Spirit purify? It is likely left unexplained because they are just not ready to hear it at that time.
Unlike what many translations would have us believe, that everyone can eat what is unclean, only the Holy Spirit filled Christian can do so. For the rest of the world it is unclean.
But the Spirit speaks plainly that in the last time they shall depart one by one from the faith and they shall go after deceiving spirits and after the teachings of demons, 2 these persons who deceive by false appearances and speak lies and sear their consciences; 3 and they forbid to be married and they abstain from foods which God has created for use and thanksgiving for those who believe and know the truth. 4 For every creation is beautiful to God, and there is nothing to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and by prayer. (1 Timothy 4:1-5)
By condemning false teachings in the future, Paul shows that the Old Covenant food laws are not in effect. He says food was created for:
But offer a hand to the one who is weak in faith and do not be divided by your disputes.
There is one who believes that he may eat everything, and he who is weak eats vegetables. 3 But let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats, for God has accepted him. 4 Who are you to judge a Servant who is not yours? For if he stands, he stands to his Master, and if he falls, he falls to his Master, for it is appointed to his Master to be able to establish him.
…
From now on let us not judge one another, but determine this rather: "You shall not lay a stumbling block for your brother." 14 For I know and I am persuaded by the lord Yahweh Yeshua that there is nothing that is defiled in his presence. But to the one who regards anything impure, it is impure to him alone.
…
And let us not destroy a Servant of God because of food, for everything is pure, but it is evil to a man who eats with offense.
…
For whoever is doubtful and eats is condemned because it is not in faith, for everything that is not from faith is sin. (Romans 14:1-23)
The person who eats only vegetables in this message, is eating only vegetables for religious reasons. He believes he is doing what is right according to God's law. He is called a brother and because of his reluctance to eat what Christians are eating and his choice of alternate food, we know he is a believer in Jesus who was a Jew.
Being an adult Jew, he would have grown up eating kosher. Now, having converted to Christianity, he is continuing in the ways he was taught from birth by his mother and father and later taught by the Torah.
Why is he eating only vegetables? Judaism doesn't prescribe that. That however is how a Jew will eat when he doesn't know if the food is kosher. Daniel and his friends asked to do the same thing in Babylon when they knew the food they were given was not kosher. Likewise, this convert from Judaism knows that the Christians he is eating with are not eating kosher.
In these verses Paul is speaking of food and clearly says that "everything is pure". This should be plain to those who want to hear.
In this passage, in verses not included above, Paul also speaks of days of observance that are no longer important. In the context of this passage, which is Jews holding on to the physicality of the laws, he can only be speaking about man-created Jewish holidays.
The Bible shows he observed the feast days himself and if he had been referring to the Sabbath, as some contend, he would soon have found himself under a pile of rocks. Instead Paul is referring to days like Purim, Tisha B'Av, Chanukah, Tu B'Shvat and others that most Christians do not know.
This provides us with solid evidence that the physical aspect of these laws is no longer in effect.
And [Shimeon-Kaypha] was hungry and he wanted to eat, and as things were being gotten for him, he fell into a trance, 11 and he saw Heaven as it was opened, and a garment which was tied at the four corners like a great linen, and it was descending from Heaven to The Earth, 12 And there were in it all kinds of four footed animals and creeping things of The Earth and birds of the sky; 13 and a voice came to him saying, "Shimeon, arise, slay and eat." 14 And Shimeon said, "Never, my Lord, because I have never eaten anything defiled or polluted." 15 And a voice came again a second time to him: "Those things which God has purified you shall not make impure." 16 This happened three times and the garment was taken up to Heaven. (Acts 10:10-16)
If we followed this story along, we would come to understand that the unclean animals in this vision represent unclean people. Another, but related, deeper meaning for unclean is presented here.
Prior to this event the Jews understood that the dividing line between clean and unclean people was Jew versus Gentile, physical bloodline. Conversion wasn't only spiritual. It converted a physical man into a physical Jew. In truth, though, the dividing line had always been God's people versus not God's people, and God decides who is who. The only way to be God's people, in the Old Covenant, had been through birth or as a proselyte. Even within the Jews, God had said that not all the Jews are Jews.
Under the New Covenant, however, the Jew / Gentile wall was gone and the true definition of clean and unclean people emerged, believers and unbelievers.
Further support for the continuation of the spiritual meaning of unclean people comes from Paul.
Do not be associates with those who are unbelievers; for what partnership has righteousness with evil, or what intimacy has light with darkness? 15 What harmony has the Messiah with Satan? What lot has a believer with an unbeliever? 16 And what agreement does the Temple of God have with demons? But you are the Temple of the living God, just as it is said, "I shall dwell in them and I shall walk in them, and I shall be their God, and they shall be a people to me. 17 Because of this, come out from among them and be separated from them, says the lord Yahweh, and you shall not touch the impure thing, and I shall receive you" (2 Corinthians 6:14-17)
Though the physical meaning of unclean food and people is gone, the spiritual meaning persists and with that the warning, do not touch. Gone are the rules about touching Gentiles and entering the houses of Gentiles; remaining is the need to keep spiritually separate from Gentiles (unbelievers). The physical law is no longer needed because the Holy Spirit can guide us in these things.
So circumcise your heart, and stiffen your neck no longer. (Deuteronomy 10:16)
Circumcise yourselves to the Lord
And remove the foreskins of your heart,
Men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem,
Or else My wrath will go forth like fire
And burn with none to quench it,
Because of the evil of your deeds. (Jeremiah 4:4)
In many places in the Old Testament, Moses and others referred to circumcision as spiritual. The physical circumcision was to be a sign of that spiritual circumcision.
Most people aren't even aware that there was a 2nd date for Passover. It was a month later than the 1st Passover. The purpose behind it was to provide an opportunity to celebrate the Passover to people who had been ceremonially impure at the time of the 1st Passover.
2nd Passover isn't a separate feast. It doesn't appear in Leviticus 23. No other feast day has a second opportunity like this.
There is absolutely no mention of 2nd Passover in the New Testament. The natural interpretation would be that this shows there is no need for it. This study shows the reason; Spirit-filled Christians cannot become ceremonially impure.
We've seen clearly that the "other" laws had both a physical and spiritual side and that the physical side does not apply in the covenant that Jesus created. That only leaves one giant question. Why?
What is it about the New Covenant that allows all those laws to remain, but only in their spiritual form?
The verses we have referenced spell it out, if we've been paying attention.
4 For every creation is beautiful to God, and there is nothing to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 for it is sanctified by the word of God and by prayer. (from 1 Timothy 4:1-5)
For I know and I am persuaded by the lord Yahweh Yeshua that there is nothing that is defiled in his presence. But to the one who regards anything impure, it is impure to him alone." (Romans 14:14)
Though it is never stated explicitly there are verses like these that hint that the Holy Spirit within us (God within us) gives us a greater authority. In these two cases we see that the impure can be made holy and even more so that the impure cannot be in his presence and must be made pure.
This power to purify impure foods is not the only power the Christian has.
We see another example of this in the area of forgiveness below.
And this is the confidence which we have toward him: everything that we ask him according to his will, he hears for us. 15 And if we are convinced that he hears us concerning whatever we ask from him, we trust that even now we receive the things that we desire which we ask from him. 16 If a man sees his brother who sins a sin that is not worthy of death, let him ask, and Life will be given to him for those who are not sinning unto death; for there is mortal sin; I do not say that a man should pray for this. 17 For every evil is sin, and there is sin that is not mortal. (1 John 5:14-17)
This is an authority that does not appear in the Old Testament - the ability to pray for the forgiveness of another person and to expect that he will be forgiven.
This authority is certainly the meaning of the following words Jesus spoke that have confused many.
And truly I say to you, everything whatsoever you will bind in the earth will have been bound in Heaven, and anything that you will release in the earth will have been released in Heaven. (Matthew 18:18)
We even see the Apostle Paul applying this teaching by leaving someone bound in sin.
Alexandros the Blacksmith showed me great evil. May Our Lord pay him according to his works. (2 Timothy 4:14)
Paul's words are theologically perfect. All of us are rewarded according to our works. Though Paul would pray that the blacksmith repent and turn to God for forgiveness, Paul is saying, if that does not happen, he wants this evil left on the blacksmith's record.
In the following quote, Paul is talking about the situation where one of the people in a marriage of unbelievers, becomes a believer. He instructs the believer to stay in the relationship and provides a couple reasons.
That man who is an unbeliever is sanctified by the wife who believes, and that woman who is not a believer is sanctified by the husband who believes, otherwise their children are defiled, but now they are pure. (1 Corinthians 7:14)
Because one spouse is a believer:
Though the New Covenant replaces the written law with Holy Spirit law, the law has not changed. That makes sense because the law is a reflection of the character of God … which does not change. The law has changed, though. Anyone can see that.
The contradiction in those two statements is intentional. Two different meanings of the word "law" are used. That turns out to be at the heart of this study and the question we are addressing.
The purpose of this study has been to determine what changed. More importantly the goal has been to determine why it changed, to find the underlying cause of the change and the foundational principles. From that basis, we can determine, case by case, the answer to the question.
We found that prophecy is not attached to or dependent on a covenant. Therefore all prophecy continues on.
We found that covenants never end, as far as God is concerned. A better covenant can effectively replace an earlier covenant, but the earlier covenant is still in place. Who would choose a poorer covenant when a better one is offered?
We found that the law can be broken into a hierarchy of laws:
We found that the Love of God, Great Sabbaths, and Ten Commandments continue into the New Covenant.
We found that, though the Great Sabbaths are still in effect, they are unobservable due to their requirement for a functional temple. Jesus left us a simplified version of Passover to remember his sacrifice. Even so, they remain, as the Apostle Paul said, "for teaching, for correction, for direction and for a course in righteousness"
We found that the Holy Spirit is the new mode for the law, replacing the written mode of the law, which can only pronounce death. In its place the Holy Spirit leads us to life, if we will follow.
We found that the "other laws" are not a requirement to enter into the New Covenant as they had been in the Old Covenant. In their absence the Noahide laws are again (still) in effect as a minimum standard.
We found that the "other laws" have both physical and deeper or spiritual components. We also found New Covenant verses for specific instances of the "other laws" showing they had both components.
We found New Covenant verses showing that the physical component of specific instances of the "other laws" had lost their effect. We also found verses showing the spiritual component was still in effect.
We found that the Holy Spirit within us has empowered and authorized us by faith and therefore purifies all impurity within us.
As a result we found that the physical component of the "other laws" no longer applies but that the spiritual component continues on.
In summary, we found that all the law from the Old Covenant continues into the New Covenant, except for the physical
components of the "other laws."
1 https://newcreeations.org/covenant-people
2 The Bible doesn't say what stone was used for the second tablets but they likely used what was available in the desert and most of that is limestone.