Paul's Passing Thoughts

A New Covenant Theology advocate submitted these questions to PPT. They are good questions and well organized. I respond to each following:

1. Do the Scriptures describe the 10 Commandments as a covenant, namely, the national covenant God made with Israel?  (Exo. 34:28).

No. The Scriptures do not describe those commandments as a “national covenant.” It’s a covenant made for a covenant people. Israel was a theocracy and it is not advisable to form covenant theologies by making a minor point major. Israel was not foremost a nation, they were foremost God’s people. However, if you want to make national Israel a major tenet of some theology; for example NCT, see Jeremiah 31:35,36.

2. To what does the Apostle Paul refer when he writes about the “ministry of death engraven in stones” (2 Cor. 3:7)?

Paul is referring to one of the ministries of the law, which in this case is the law’s only solution for sin: death. That particular ministry of the law was abolished by Christ for those who believe in Him. Obviously, the law has other ministries. See Psalm 119.

3. Does he seem to suggest that the new covenant of which he is a minister is inferior or superior to that ministry of death written in stones?

Neither. Paul says that the NC has more glory, but speaks to the glory that the other covenant also possessed: “If the ministry that condemns men is glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness!” That doesn’t mean the law is not a measure of righteousness, it means the law can’t impute righteousness to the individual, only Christ can do that. The atonement abolishes the law’s ministry of death, but that doesn’t mean  all other ministry’s of the law are abolished also.

4. What does Paul say is happening to that ministry of death/national covenant made with Israel?

Again, I reject the premise of a “national covenant.” BUT in agreement with you, the ministry of death has most definitely been abolished. Another solution for sin has been found in Jesus Christ. BUT, that doesn’t mean that EVERY ministry of the law has been abolished!

5. Is the covenant God made with Israel identical with the Old Testament Scriptures?  If the two are not identical (and they are not) is it not possible to live under a New Covenant without denying the value and validity of the Old Testament Scriptures?

The covenants are elements of the Old Testament Scriptures—I reject a theological dichotomy between the two. For example, James preached the same thing Paul did regardless of the fact that the book of James almost didn’t make it into the NT canon because of  James’ strong emphasis on imperatives. Furthermore, “value and validity [in regard to what?]” doesn’t equal: learn and apply.

6. Where is the passage in the New Testament Scriptures that gives the slightest indication that the New Covenant believer is to look to the Ten Commandments as his standard of sanctification?  It would be helpful in proving your contention if only the Apostle had written, “He who loves his fellowman WILL FULFILL the law (Rom. 8:13).  The problem is he didn’t.  He wrote, “He who loves. . .HAS FULFILLED THE LAW.”  The New Testament Scriptures do a superb job of defining for us what it is like to love our fellowman, thus preventing us from turning love into lust and licentiousness.

Again, I reject your premise that the “Ten Commandments (a term not used in Scripture)” is somehow a separate entity apart from the rest of Scripture. Did Exodus 20 come from God’s mouth? Then we live by it: Matthew 4:4. NCT theologians have to make that dichotomy because of what Paul said to Timothy in 3:16 regarding ALL Scripture being profitable for EVERY good work. But throughout the Bible, “law” and “Scripture” are used interchangeably. This can be seen clearly in Galatians 4:21-31 where Paul wrote: “Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says?” He then cites Genesis 21 and Isaiah 54 to make his points. It’s all “the law.” Furthermore, I totally reject the idea that all of the law has been replaced with a single law of love. Paul was eluding to the fact that selfism is the essence of sin, and loving others as much as we already love ourselves captures the essence of the law. In other words, we follow the law in-spite of ourselves. Scripture is clearly the standard for what love is. See 1Corinthians 13. For instance, if not for the law, we wouldn’t know that love “doesn’t keep a record of wrong.”

7. If a person believes New Covenant believers are under the law of Christ and that Christ’s law expresses the same eternal, and immutable righteous standard as that reflected in the 10 Commandments, he can’t really be considered as being against law (antinomian) can he?

Yes. Because the issue is not only what one thinks of the law, but also what he believes in regard to the application of it. NCT praises the law while rejecting the biblically prescribed application to life.

8. Is the ministry of the Holy Spirit in the believer’s life sufficiently effective to accomplish the work of sanctification according to the New Testament standard?

I suspect the point of this question is to establish the idea that Evangelicals think the Holy Spirit needs our help in sanctification. This is the GS either/or hermeneutic. It’s either ALL law or ALL gospel; either ALL the Holy Spirit, or ALL us. Of course the Spirit is all sufficient, but guess what? If we don’t do anything—nothing’s going to happen. The Holy Spirit is our “helper.” So, what’s a “helper?”

9. If the Sabbath observance is the sign of the covenant God made with Israel (see-Exodus 31:17), would it not be temporally coextensive with the covenant of which it was the sign? In other words, would not the Sabbath observance endure only as long as the covenant endured?  Now, if that covenant has become antiquated by the establishment of the new and everlasting covenant, and the New Testament Scriptures provide abundant evidence that it has now been thus replaced, would it not make sense that God’s new covenant people are not now under the sign of a covenant that does not belong to them?

The passage you cite says it is a sign “forever.” So, God didn’t know at the time that he was going to replace it? But 31:13 states that it is also a sign that God has set them apart for His use. Hence, one reason for the law and the importance thereof: it is a sign that we are set apart. That’s just as important today as it was then. Another practical application of this law is the following:
”But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your ox, your donkey or any of your animals, nor the alien within your gates, so that your manservant and maidservant may rest, as you do” (Deuteronomy 5:14).

The law guaranteed a day of rest for slaves and servants. Deuteronomy is full of rules that were designed to guide masters in compassionate and fair treatment of slaves and women. Though the application for today might differ—the principles are the same. One might also note that there are between 600 and 700 imperatives in the OT while the NT has between 1000 and 1100 imperatives.

10. Are today’s believers under the old covenant or the new covenant?  If under the old covenant, why does the Apostle Paul write that he is a minister of the new covenant (2Cor. 3:6). If the covenant Paul is talking about is the ministry of death/condemnation written on tablets of stone, the 10 commandments, what does that tell us about the believers relationship to the 10 commandments?

Again, we see the incorrect premise of the either/or hermeneutic. It’s either ALL the old covenant or ALL the new covenant. The law’s ministry of death is abolished while its promises and ministry of blessings are clearly still active (Ephesians 6:1-3). Also, Paul wrote to the Galatians that the law was added “because of transgressions.” This speaks of the law’s purpose to restrain sin in general and instruct believers in regard to kingdom living. Also, “under the….” in regard to what? Justification or sanctification? No, NC believers are not “under” the law for justification, but does the law still serve to set us apart from the world as a sign that we are God’s covenant people? Absolutely.

Furthermore, it is apparent that the “covenants of promise [plural]” seem to build on each other while certain elements are no longer needed. Ephesians 2:12 seems to indicate this as Paul includes them in a description of being in a state of salvation. Moreover, the New Covenant is made with Israel specifically, and even if you want to make Israel the church, the New Covenant is clearly not fully consummated:

“’This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time,’ declares the LORD. ’I will put my law in their minds  and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest,’ declares the LORD” (Jeremiah 31:33-34).

The time when people will no longer need to be taught about God because God will write  the law on their hearts Himself rather than our participation thereof (Proverbs 3:3, 7:3) is clearly not here yet—we still need to be taught. The need for knowledge has not yet passed away (1Cor 13:8).  Notice also the correlation between knowing God and the law. Though love is a constant foundation to the law, the need to have knowledge of the law has clearly not yet passed.

paul