Dismissing the “Old” Testament – Part 2
Dear Phil,
Where do we get the belief that the Old Testament is ‘old’? Why do people quickly state, ‘That’s Old Testament,’ and dismiss what it says? Correct me if I’m wrong, but the early New Testament church read and studied scripture...which would have been the Old Testament, right?
Tom
Where do we get the belief that the Old Testament is ‘old’? Why do people quickly state, ‘That’s Old Testament,’ and dismiss what it says? Correct me if I’m wrong, but the early New Testament church read and studied scripture...which would have been the Old Testament, right?
Tom
Dear Tom,
In my December column, I noted five reasons people tend to dismiss the Old Testament. The first two were that they have been wrongly taught that what the Old Testament says only applies to us if the New Testament repeats it, and they don’t notice the ways the New Testament writers interpret and apply texts from the Old Testament to New Covenant believers. The third reason is that they don’t know the difference between Torah, law, and covenant/testament.
Let’s start with the phrase, “Old Testament” (OT). This phrase has two uses: to identify the first 39 books of the Bible, from Genesis to Malachi; and (in the KJV and NKJV) to translate a Greek phrase that means “old covenant” (2 Cor 3:14; Heb 8:13). A great deal of confusion follows from these two uses. To unravel this confusion, we need to know the following:
Therefore, what the Hebrew writer says “is ready to vanish away” (Heb 8:13) was the old covenant, not the Old Testament. In other words, most of what we call the Old Testament is not the old covenant.
When we consider how the authors of Scripture referred to what we call the “Old Testament,” we find that none of them use that term. The standard language authors used before Christ includes “law of Moses,” “law of Yahweh,” “law and the commandments,” and “the books” (Dan 9:2). The standard language authors used after Christ includes “the law,” “it is written,” “scripture(s),” “the prophet(s),” “the law and the prophets,” and “it/he says” (primarily in Hebrews). Only in Paul and in Hebrews do we find the language of “old covenant” (2 Cor 3:14; Heb 8:13) or “first covenant” (Heb 9:15, 18). Both “old covenant” and “first covenant” refer to the Mosaic Covenant, and not to the entire Hebrew Bible (Torah, Prophets, Writings). They do not refer to what we call the Old Testament.
Admittedly, there is little likelihood that “Old Testament” could be successfully replaced by a more accurate term, such as Hebrew Bible. It has been in use this way since the 2nd century AD. However, once we understand that the NT authors distinguished between the first/old covenant and the rest of what we call the Old Testament, we are positioned to think more accurately. The “old covenant” is not identical to the Old Testament. It is a subset of both the Torah (Pentateuch) and the Old Testament as a whole.
In the NT, the word “law” can refer to: (a) the Torah or first five books of the OT (Gal 4:21), (b) the covenant God made with Israel at Sinai (Gal 3:23–24), (c) legal material found in the Torah, including but not limited to Mosaic covenantal stipulations (1 Cor 9:9), (d) the Book of Psalms (John 10:34; 15:25), and (e) the entire set of Scriptures from Genesis to Malachi (Gal 3:11; cf. 1 Cor 14:21). With such a range of uses, context is crucial. Next time I’ll look at the context of Romans 6:14 to determine what “not under law” means.
Blessings,
Phil
In my December column, I noted five reasons people tend to dismiss the Old Testament. The first two were that they have been wrongly taught that what the Old Testament says only applies to us if the New Testament repeats it, and they don’t notice the ways the New Testament writers interpret and apply texts from the Old Testament to New Covenant believers. The third reason is that they don’t know the difference between Torah, law, and covenant/testament.
Let’s start with the phrase, “Old Testament” (OT). This phrase has two uses: to identify the first 39 books of the Bible, from Genesis to Malachi; and (in the KJV and NKJV) to translate a Greek phrase that means “old covenant” (2 Cor 3:14; Heb 8:13). A great deal of confusion follows from these two uses. To unravel this confusion, we need to know the following:
|
Therefore, what the Hebrew writer says “is ready to vanish away” (Heb 8:13) was the old covenant, not the Old Testament. In other words, most of what we call the Old Testament is not the old covenant.
When we consider how the authors of Scripture referred to what we call the “Old Testament,” we find that none of them use that term. The standard language authors used before Christ includes “law of Moses,” “law of Yahweh,” “law and the commandments,” and “the books” (Dan 9:2). The standard language authors used after Christ includes “the law,” “it is written,” “scripture(s),” “the prophet(s),” “the law and the prophets,” and “it/he says” (primarily in Hebrews). Only in Paul and in Hebrews do we find the language of “old covenant” (2 Cor 3:14; Heb 8:13) or “first covenant” (Heb 9:15, 18). Both “old covenant” and “first covenant” refer to the Mosaic Covenant, and not to the entire Hebrew Bible (Torah, Prophets, Writings). They do not refer to what we call the Old Testament.
Admittedly, there is little likelihood that “Old Testament” could be successfully replaced by a more accurate term, such as Hebrew Bible. It has been in use this way since the 2nd century AD. However, once we understand that the NT authors distinguished between the first/old covenant and the rest of what we call the Old Testament, we are positioned to think more accurately. The “old covenant” is not identical to the Old Testament. It is a subset of both the Torah (Pentateuch) and the Old Testament as a whole.
In the NT, the word “law” can refer to: (a) the Torah or first five books of the OT (Gal 4:21), (b) the covenant God made with Israel at Sinai (Gal 3:23–24), (c) legal material found in the Torah, including but not limited to Mosaic covenantal stipulations (1 Cor 9:9), (d) the Book of Psalms (John 10:34; 15:25), and (e) the entire set of Scriptures from Genesis to Malachi (Gal 3:11; cf. 1 Cor 14:21). With such a range of uses, context is crucial. Next time I’ll look at the context of Romans 6:14 to determine what “not under law” means.
Blessings,
Phil