This is "off the top of my head." It is meant only as start to stimulate thinking. and comment. JGR
I. The Bible, all 66 books. are equally inspired by God. II Tim. 3:15.
II. All 66 books of the Bible are profitable and authoritative for “teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteous.” II Tim. 3:15
III. The “Scriptures which Timothy learned (II Tim. 3:15) and which are both inspired by God and therefore profitable and authoritative for “teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteous” are referring to the OTS in Paul’s admonition in II Tim. 3:15-17. It is these Scriptures that Paul said could “equip the man of God for every good work” (II Tim 3:17).
IV. The 39 books written before Christ (Genesis to Malachi - we will call these 39 books the “Old Testament Scriptures.”) are just as must the authoritative Word of God for the Christian today as they were for the Israelite. Those 39 books are a vital part of the rule of life for a Christian today. However, the OTS must be understood and interpreted through the lens of the 27 books written after Christ (which we will call the “New Testament Scriptures.”)
V. We total reject calling the 39 books written before Christ “the Old Testament” and likewise reject calling the 27 books written after Christ “the New Testament.” Using these labels to divide up our Bibles has caused no end of confusion.
1. We clearly distinguish, and seek to maintain in our teaching, the real and distinct difference between the phrase “Old Testament” and “Old Covenant.” The phrase “Old Testament,” when used to refer to the 39 books of the Bible written before Christ is purely a literally division without any Scriptural authority. The phrase “Old Covenant” is a Biblical term and should be used exclusively for the “Old Covenant” that God made with Israel at Mount Sinai. The “Old Testament Scriptures” have a historical beginning but no historical end. They will remain forever a part of the inspired Word of God. The “Old Covenant” also has a historical beginning, at Mount Sinai, and it also had an historical end, at the coming of Christ. The New Covenant that Christ established replaces, in its totality, the Old Covenant.”
2. Likewise we insist that we do the same thing with the phrase “New Testament Scriptures” and “New Covenant.” The New Testament Scriptures, the 27 books of the Bible written after Christ came, do not replace the Old Testament Scriptures; they are added to the 39 books and become part of our one equally inspired Bible. On the other hand, the “New Covenant” totally replaces and does away with the “Old Covenant.”
3. When NCT insists that the “Old Covenant” in its entirety has been done away, we do not mean the “Old Testament Scriptures” have been done away in any sense whatever. Not one single verse in the entire Old Testament Scriptures has been done away even though the Old Covenant” in its entirety has been done away.
VI. The center of the Bible and the key to understanding its message and its unity is the Person and Work of the Lord Jesus Christ. Covenants and Dispensations are important and understanding them both are essential to understanding the message of the Bible but the redemptive work of Christ as planned, purposed and brought about by God’s sovereign providence is the key to the Bible. The Bible is a HIM-book.
See Heb. 10:5 and Luke 24.
VII. The bulk of the Bible is built around two major covenants. They are described in Scripture as the “Old and New Covenants.” See Gal. 4:24-26. Jer. 31:31-34 cf. Heb. 8:6-10; 10:15,16.
VIII. Both of these covenants are clearly identified in Scripture as the covenant made with Israel at Sinai and the New Covenant in Christ that replaces the Old Covenant made with Israel at Sinai. See Gal 4:24-26 and Heb. 8:6-13.
IX. Exactly what is “the Old Covenant”? When, and with whom, was it made? What are its specific terms? Why was it so essential that the Old Covenant must be done away and replaced with the New Covenant? These questions will be answered in detail later. We are only concerned with an outline at this point.
(1) The basic summary document of the Old Covenant was the “Tablets of the Covenant” or Ten Commandments given to Israel at Sinai as the terms of their national covenant relationship with God.. See Exodus 34:27-29; Deut. 5:1-4; 9:9-11. This is why the box that was built for the express purpose of housing the stone tablets containing the Ten Commandments is called the “Ark of the Covenant,” it housed the summary document of the covenant or Tablets of the Covenant. See Deut: 9:9-11. For a detailed study of the place and function of the Ten Commandments in Scripture see our book, “The Tablets of Stone & the History of Redemption.”
(2) “The Book of the Covenant”was added and made a part of the Old Covenant. See Exodus 24:6-8. This book was laid along side of the Ark of the Covenant (Deut. 31:26).At different times in history the Book of Law was revised. The Tablets of the Covenant was never changed. In actual fact, the Tablets of the Covenant, or Ten Commandments, were only seen by human eyes one time after being put in that box and that one look cost 50,070 lives (1 Sam. 6:19). Paul calls the Book of the Covenant “the Book of the Law” in Gal. 3:10.
(3) Finally the entire system of laws and ceremonies became part of the”Old Covenant.” See Jer. 34:13,14 and 2 Kings 23:21 for proof that the so-called ceremonial law was considered part of the Old Covenant.1 The Old Covenant equals Judaism. The phrase “the Law of Moses” is synonymous the “Old Covenant.”
One of the basic problems New Covenant Theology must deal with concerns the relationship of the Old to the New. Notice I did not say what “Old” and “New” I was talking about. That fact is part of the real problem that we face. If I am asking what the relationship is between the Old and New Covenants that is one thing. If I am asking what is the relationship between the Old and New Testaments I asking an entirely different question. If I am asking what is the relationship between the Old Covenant and the New Testament then I am really confusing the issue.
The problem we are discussing is called “Continuity versus Discontinuity.” What part of the Old is brought over into the New and what is fulfilled and done away? Again, the question is confusing and impossible to answer until we ask and answer “What specific old and new thing are you talking about?” My answer will make some people angry and others will quit reading and say, “Reisinger’s simplistic answer shows that he does not understand how complex the problem is.” In my defense, let me say that I do understand how complex the question is if the questions are framed within current systematic theologies. However, the complexity grows out of not carefully defining exactly what we talking about. That requires carefully defining the terms we are using.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 At one point I held that the Old Covenant and the Ten Commandments were one on one the same thing. I changed my mind and now hold to the above. My detailed reasons for changning are set forth in my book “Tablets of Stone.”
--
Read the Sound of Grace pages at
http://www.soundofgrace.com
To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...
To view our online archive go to our web page at
http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace