Seven Myths of Denominationalism 
by David Brown

Myth 2 - The Old Testament is Still Binding

2.1 WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT?

 I expect that after reading this chapter many members of denominations will

readily agree and affirm that they have always believed that we are under the New

Testament today. However, I spent the first 18 years of my life in a denomination

faithfully attending bible study and services where preaching was performed. For some

reason there was never any emphasis on the difference between the testaments. We often

hear of people picking up their bibles and opening it at random and reading a passage in

a mystical attempt to obtain a communication with God. This chapter will provide a

sound basis from which we can begin to organize our understanding of the bible to see

what applies to us and what does not.

 God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34-35): "Then Peter opened [his] mouth,

and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he

that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him." He requires the same

thing of you and me that he required of Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses; namely that

we be faithful and diligently seek after Him (Hebrews 11:6): "But without faith [it is]

impossible to please [him]: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and [that] he

is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him."

 However, it should also be clear that the way in which this faith was sought after

and demonstrated was considerably different for some than for others. It is obvious that

God's law for us is not that we refrain from eating the forbidden fruit (as it was for

Adam), or that we build an arc (as it was for Noah), or that we sacrifice our son (as it was

for Abraham). We realize that not only are these things not commanded of us today, but

if we were to teach them for God's law today, it would be sin. If some church leader today were

to insist that the congregation undertake the task of building a huge ship in preparation

for a flood, we would question his sanity.

 The reasoning in the paragraph above is common sense. However, as this chapter

unfolds we will see that such sense was (and is) not always held in common. The major

point that we are trying to make is that just because something was commanded by God

at one time does not make it a command for us today. While this is generally understood

with regard to Adam, Noah and Abraham, the differences between the Old and New

Testaments are not very well understood.

 We will see that when men practiced and attempted to bind a part of God's law

that no longer applied, this was considered to be sin. It was not an act of faith, nor was it 2

diligently seeking after God. Thus, it was impossible for those who practice(d) such

things to be pleasing to God (Hebrews 11:6 quoted above).

 In 1 Timothy 2:15 we read: "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman

that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." The command to

rightly divide or handle the word of truth correctly infers that it can be wrongfully

handled. This would include misquoting, misapplying, taking scriptures out of context

and applying commands to ourselves which God does not intend for us to apply (such as

taking it upon ourselves to build an arc today).

 Thus, we can no more pick and choose what it is that we want to accept out of the

bible than we can discard it altogether. The picking and choosing is, in fact, both adding

to and taking away from God's word, both of which are definitively condemned

(Revelation 22:18-19): "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the

prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the

plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of

the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of

the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book."

 In this chapter we will see that it has not been left to us to determine that part of

God's word which applies to us today -- the bible clearly indicates what applies and what

does not. In addition, we will further validate that to go beyond that which applies to us

is sin.

2.2 WE ARE UNDER THE NEW TESTAMENT

 We recognize that many in the denominations believe this. However, the degree

to which they go to the Old Testament to authorize some current-day practices convinces

us that many do not fully understand this rightful division of the word of God. This was

a very serious problem within the church in the first century. It seemed to arise in almost

every church, mainly because of the influence of Jewish converts. We will divide our

presentation into three categories: (1) Jesus' teachings in the gospels, (2) inspired apostolic

examples throughout the book of Acts, and (3) the teachings of the Holy Spirit through

the writings of the apostles. Once this is complete we will demonstrate that the Old

Testament is totally true and that it serves an essential purpose for us today.

2.2.1 THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS

 Jesus lived under the Old Testament law. As we shall see, this was essential, since

He had to obey the Old Testament law in every possible way in order for it to be taken

out of the way for us. He totally fulfilled it for us so that God's justice can still prevail 3

despite the fact that we have not obeyed it. All of this will be proven scripturally as this

chapter unfolds.

 The paragraph above is to enable us to understand the reasons that Jesus did not

teach that the Old Testament was done away prior to His crucifixion. It is essential that

we understand that certain information could not be understood, and therefore it was not

fully revealed until after the Holy Spirit was sent to inspire the first century apostles and

prophets. This occurred after Jesus' death, burial and resurrection.

 Consider the message of the transfiguration as recorded in Mark 9:2-9:

"And after six days Jesus taketh [with him] Peter, and James, and John, and leadeth

them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was

transfigured before them. And his raiment became shining, exceeding

white as snow; so as no fuller on earth can white them. And there appeared

unto them Elias with Moses: and they were talking with Jesus. And Peter

answered and said to Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us

make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.

For he wist not what to say; for they were sore afraid. And there was a

cloud that overshadowed them: and a voice came out of the cloud, saying,

This is my beloved Son: hear him. And suddenly, when they had looked

round about, they saw no man any more, save Jesus only with themselves.

And as they came down from the mountain, he charged them that they

should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen

from the dead."

  Moses and Elias represent the Old Testament law and the prophets. Jesus recognized that

the message of the transfiguration (that Jesus' words would take precedence over the Old

Testament) could not be fully understood until after His resurrection. This appears to be

the reason that he charged them to tell no on about it until then.

 As a Jew, Jesus lived under the Old Testament law. As one who had faith in His

heavenly father, He obeyed the law that was in effect -- the Old Testament law. Most of

His interactions were with other Jews who were similarly under the Old Testament law.

So, generally throughout the life of Christ (i.e., the gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and

John), we find Jesus encouraging his fellow Jews to keep the law under which they lived.

For example (Matthew 23:1-3): "Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,

Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid

you observe, [that] observe and do." However, Jesus alluded to a time when this would

not be the case.

 For example, His very appearance on earth marked a dramatic change in the way

that God would deal with man. This concept was not foreign to the Old Testament, but it 4

was only revealed in prospect. Now it was becoming a reality. Thus, in Luke 10:23-24 it

says in reference to Jesus: "And he turned him unto [his] disciples, and said privately,

Blessed [are] the eyes which see the things that ye see: For I tell you, that many prophets

and kings have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen [them]; and to

hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard [them]."

 A second example is given in John 4:7-26, a lengthy reading which is commonly

called the story of the woman at the well. Being both a woman and a Samaritan, she was

quite surprised that Jesus would address her "for the Jews have no dealings with the

Samaritans" (vs. 9). Jesus got her attention by revealing that He knew about her personal

life, after which she quickly changed the subject to that of the doctrinal differences which

existed between the Jews and the Samaritans (vs. 20): "Our fathers worshipped in this

mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship. Jesus

saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this

mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father." It is clear that Jesus was not

excluding Samaritans, as the portion of the Old Testament that the Jews were living under

would have. Further, He indicates that the temple worship mandated by the Old

Testament would no longer be in effect.

 Jesus gave the most insightful instructions with regard to the revelation of the New

Testament to His apostles the last night that He spent with them. The entire sequence of

events and instructions is in John 13-16. In John 14:25, Jesus indicated that He had

initiated a new revelation which would continue with them: "These things have I spoken

unto you, being [yet] present with you. But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Spirit,

whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things

to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." This clearly indicates that the

Old Testament would (and will) no longer suffice. It is important to realize that this

statement is made to the apostles (minus Judas Iscariot); it should be clear that all

Christians do not have the capacity to remember "whatsoever I [Jesus] have said unto you."

 As we proceed to review the book of Acts and the epistles we shall see that it was

through the apostles that the New Testament was revealed. This is further affirmed by

Jesus in John 15:26-27: "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from

the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of

me: And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning."

Interestingly, being "with me [Jesus] from the beginning" was the primary qualification

for the apostle who took the place of Judas Iscariot (see Acts 1:21-22). Thus, to be a witness

in this sense, one had to be an eye witness. However, these eye witnesses would also be

endowed by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit to assure that their human memory

limitations would not get in the way. There is also an inference that in due time

additional information would be required (e.g., to assist with the work and organization

of the church).

 Now keep reading into the 16th chapter as Jesus continues (John 16:1-3): "These

things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not be offended. They shall put you out of

the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth

God service. And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the

Father, nor me." Clearly, if Christians were to be expelled from the synagogue, there is no

way that they could obey the Old Testament law. The prophecy that the killing of

Christians would be viewed (by the Jews) as service to God was fulfilled (at least in part)

by Saul of Tarsus prior to his conversion and becoming the apostle Paul.

 Without the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus the gospel could not become

reality, and the full truth of God's justice, righteousness and mercy toward man could not

be told. Jesus put it this way (John 16:7-11): "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is

expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto

you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the

world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on

me; Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; Of judgment,

because the prince of this world is judged."

 Jesus went on in the next few verses to indicate that they needed to observe the

events which were about to transpire in order to fully understand the essence of the

gospel (John 16:12-13): "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them

now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he

shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will

show you things to come."

 In addition, there would be a clarification -- the general terms, or proverbs, in

which he spoke to them would be specifically detailed (John 16:25-28): "These things have

I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you

in proverbs, but I shall show you plainly of the Father. At that day ye shall ask in my

name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you: For the Father himself

loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God. I

came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go

to the Father."

 When Jesus' disciples argued with him about this, he indicated that they were just

too weak at this point to fully understand. Continuing our reading (John 16:29-33): "His

disciples said unto him, Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no proverb. Now

are we sure that thou knowest all things, and needest not that any man should ask thee:

but this we believe that thou camest forth from God. Jesus answered them, Do ye now

believe? Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man

to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with

me. These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world

ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." 

 The arguments presented above do not definitively prove that the Old Testament

was set aside as the standard of authority under which we live today. However, they do

provide a firm basis by which we can understand the history revealed in the book of Acts

and the epistles with regard to this subject. These are considered in the next two

subsections.

2.2.2 THE APPROVED EXAMPLES OF THE BOOK OF ACTS

 The book of Acts (Acts of the Apostles) provides the record of the historic

fulfillment of the promises that Jesus made to His apostles. By seeing how these were

fulfilled we can understand which part of God's word applies directly to us today. The

book of Acts begins after the resurrection of Jesus, when He "showed himself alive after

his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the

things pertaining to the kingdom of God" (Acts 1:3). The first chapter covers his ascension

into heaven and the replacement of Judas Iscariot. The events of Acts 2 occurred on the

first Pentecost after the resurrection, which would be about 50 days after the resurrection,

and thus 10 days after the ascension. The Holy Spirit was poured out onto the apostles at

this time, and Peter preached the first sermon inspired by the Holy Spirit. While this

sermon did not specifically indicate that the Old Testament law had been set aside, it did

indicate that there was a new way that men were to become acceptable to God, and that

was through the blood of Jesus (Acts 2:37-42). (We will return to a more detailed

discussion of Acts 2 when we discuss baptism under Myth 4.)

 Despite the fact that there were men from a wide diversity of nations present for

the Jewish celebration of Pentecost (Acts 2), at this point the gospel was only preached to

Jews, and the newly-formed church was localized to Jerusalem. Chapter 3 presents the

story of a man healed by Peter and John, and their taking advantage of this occasion as an

opportunity to further preach the gospel. However, in Chapter 4 we find the first

persecution of the church was initiated by the very ones to whom the gospel was first

directed -- the Jews.

 Acts chapters 4 and 5 continue to demonstrate this persecution, while Chapter 6

gets into their concentration upon a single individual: Stephen. Chapter 7 is a very

interesting chapter from the point of view of the topic of this chapter. It clearly

demonstrates that it was not the position of the apostles or first-century prophets that the

Old Testament was in any way erroneous. Great pains are take throughout this chapter

to document the fact that Stephen believed every word of the Old Testament. However, before

he could show how the Old Testament led logically to our being under a new covenant

after the death of Christ, he was brutally murdered by the Jews to whom he was

preaching. 

 This led to a general persecution of the church and, as a result, most of the

Christians were scattered (Acts 8:4): "Therefore they that were scattered abroad went

every where preaching the word." This led to the conversion of many Samaritans, who

were a type of half-breed race that were not considered by the Jews to be in the general

classification of gentiles. Acts 8 also records the conversion of an Ethiopian Jewish

proselyte with the help of Philip (one of the Christians scattered from Jerusalem). This

was one of the first (if not the first) black persons converted to Christ, further fulfilling the

"all the nations" clause of the Great Commission (Mt. 28:19).

 The character Saul is introduced in Acts 7:58 and 8:1 in connection with his

contribution to the death of Stephen. His conversion is detailed in Acts 9, and he will

henceforth be called Paul -- the apostle Paul. Recognize that considerable time could have

passed in this chapter as attention is given to the miracles performed by the apostle Peter

in the latter part of chapter 9.

 Acts chapter 10 is a very significant event with regard to our subject -- the

conversion of Cornelius' household, who were the first gentiles converted to Christ. If the

Old Testament were still binding, the apostle Peter would have great difficulty in visiting

one of another nation (Acts 10:28): "And he [Peter] said unto them, Ye know how that it is

an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another

nation; but God hath showed me that I should not call any man common or unclean."

However, God sent several visions to convince Peter that no person was to be considered

lower than another.

 The racial significance of the differences between the Old and New Testaments are

quite important, and they explain the reason that this issue presented such difficulty for

the church in the first century. The Old Testament was very adamant that God wanted

His chosen people to be separate from other nations. The only way for those of other

nations to be in any way accepted by the Jews was for them to become proselytes to the

Jewish Nation and religion, which were practically one and the same. As we continue, we

will cite a number of Old Testament prophecies which indicated that this practice

(attitude) was to cease. However, at this point, this was not generally understood by

many of the Jews who had been converted to Christ. Acts 10:34-35 summarizes Peter's

conclusion with regard to racial and national qualifications: "Then Peter opened [his]

mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every

nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him."

 Peter had brought some of the skeptical Jewish Christians with him from

Jerusalem, and the 11th chapter of Acts is largely devoted to documenting the fact that

gentiles were converted directly to Christ without first becoming Jewish proselytes

(which would have required that the males be circumcised). Acts 11:25-26 also ties up a

loose end with regard to the apostle Paul: "Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek

Saul: And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, 8

that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people.

And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch."

 Herod's murder of the apostle James (the brother of John) is described in Acts

chapter 12. After this, attention returns to Antioch -- the church which would be the

major center for sending preachers to the gentile world. Paul and Barnabas were sent out

specifically to gentile areas of the world from Antioch, although they generally initiated

their work by preaching at the synagogues first. When rejected and then persecuted by

their fellow Jews (with some notable individual exceptions), they turned to the gentiles.

Acts 13 and 14 describe what is usually called Paul's first missionary journey.

 This brings us to the first major passage which deals specifically with our subject:

Acts 15. While we will quote some of the most salient passages from this text, we urge the

reader to review the entire chapter before proceeding. The stage is set by Paul returning

to Antioch after his first missionary journey and continuing to work with the Christians

there. While he was there (Acts 15:1): "... certain men which came down from Judaea

taught the brethren, [and said], Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye

cannot be saved." This certainly was a primary edict of the Old Testament law, and if

Christians were under this law (i.e., if the Old Testament were binding on them), then this

would certainly be something which should be taught and practiced.

 However, this was not the case, and the apostle Paul through inspiration of the

Holy Spirit knew that this was false doctrine. All throughout Acts 13 and 14 (i.e., the first

missionary journey) he had taught otherwise. The word therefore in verse 2 indicates that

the reader would expect Paul to have a problem with these brethren trying to bind

something which God had loosed at the cost of the death of His dear son. Acts 15:2:

"When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them,

they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to

Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question."

 Many believe and teach that it was necessary for this issue to be resolved by a

"church council." This terminology is foreign to the bible. Paul was directly inspired by

the Holy Spirit and needed no church council to tell him what was right or wrong. Notice

the next few verses (Acts 15:3-4): "And being brought on their way by the church, they

passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they

caused great joy unto all the brethren. And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were

received of the church, and [of] the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that

God had done with them." Indeed, if anything, Paul was going to Jerusalem to set them

straight. In reality, however, it was to dispel the lie told by the false, i.e., that they were

authorized by the apostles in Jerusalem.

 As we continue reading, we see this (Acts 15:5): "But there rose up certain of the

sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and 9

to command [them] to keep the law of Moses." Here was the crux of the matter.

Circumcision was just a marker for the entire law of Moses. There was nothing wrong

with these individuals practicing these Old Testament teachings as they felt appropriate.

But it was completely wrong for them to bind them on other Christians; and it still is

today.

 Following this, the apostles and elders gathered together with regard to this matter

and, weighing the evidence presented by Peter (recall Acts 10-11), Paul, and finally James

quoting from the Old Testament (Acts 15:13-17): "And after they had held their peace,

James answered, saying, Men [and] brethren, hearken unto me: Simeon [Peter] hath

declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his

name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return,

and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again

the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord,

and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these

things." The Old Testament reference is from Amos 9:11-12.

 It is quite significant that even in the time when the New Testament was in the

process of being revealed and written, the value of the written Old Testament scriptures

in validating doctrine was never questioned. If, in fact, the doctrines of the New

Testament were not totally consistent with those of the Old Testament, then there would

be just cause to doubt them. The fact that the Old Testament was no longer binding did

not mean that it was any less true, any more than the fact that God does not now want us

to build arcs invalidates the story of Noah.

 The resolution of the matter was totally consistent with the doctrine originally

taught be both Paul and Peter; to review Peter's words (Acts 10:34-35): "Of a truth I

perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and

worketh righteousness, is accepted with him." While I hope that most of the readers can

readily accept this, it was not an easy pill to swallow in the first century. From the racial

divisions that exist in most religious organizations today, we should readily understand

the reason that this is true. As we continue we will see that Christians are to recognize no

racial distinctions as they "go into all of the world." All of the world begins within our

own communities.

 This theme continues throughout the book of Acts as we follow the remainder of

Paul's journeys. However, we will terminate this line of thought and leave it to the reader

to study through the rest of the book of Acts with this in mind. There is tremendous

evidence that we are no longer bound by the Old Testament law in the epistles, so it is

advantageous that we move on to that phase of our proof.

2.2.3 THE TEACHINGS OF THE EPISTLES

 The epistles were written by the inspired apostles (Paul, Peter and John) and one

by a prophet (James). Generally they were written to the church that existed in a

particular city (Rome, Corinth, etc.) or area. In some cases they were written to individual

Christians (Timothy, Titus, Philemon), and sometimes to

Christians in general. One was written to an entire nation (Hebrews). In all cases these

writings have the full weight of the authority of Jesus, as we showed in Chapter 1 (e.g., 1

Cor. 14:37).

 It is important to recognize that the early churches which were established by the

preaching of the word (see Acts 13-14) were made up of men and women just like you

and me. We all have our weaknesses. Even those churches today which are in fellowship

with the Lord will have problems as these churches did. It is not our job to determine

who is and who is not in fellowship with the Lord -- and this is not our intent. However,

we know that the churches at Rome, Corinth, Galatia, etc. which had inspired letters

written to them were indeed considered to be in fellowship with the Lord even though it

is clear that certain of their members were in error.

 Recognize that our intent, and the intent of this chapter, is to dispel the myth that

we are still bound by the Old Testament law. We do not have the space to cover all of the

New Testament teaching which deals with this subject. However, the ones that we will

cover will compel anyone who believes the New Testament to understand what the

inspired writers wanted their readers to comprehend. The subsections below will be

ordered according to the epistles from which the scriptural proof is taken.

2.2.3.1 ROMANS

 It is difficult to know where to start. The subject starts in Romans 2:17 and really

continues through chapter 11. We will try to pick out some of the most definitive

arguments.

 First recognize that Paul sometimes uses the term circumcision to refer to the entire

Law of Moses under which the Jews lived prior to Jesus' death on the cross. At other

times he uses it to refer to the binding of this particular article of the Old Testament. For

example, in Romans 2:25-29: "For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if

thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. Therefore if the

uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted

for circumcision? And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law,

judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? For he is not a

Jew, which is one outwardly; neither [is that] circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

But he [is] a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision [is that] of the heart, in the

spirit, [and] not in the letter; whose praise [is] not of men, but of God." The law referenced 11

above is the Law of Moses by which the Jews were attempting to gain salvation.

 This is important in understanding what Paul was attempting to communicate

with them over the next several chapters. For example, picking up the reading in Romans

3:19-26:

"Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are

under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may

become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no

flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law [is] the knowledge of sin. But

now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being

witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God

[which is] by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for

there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of

God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in

Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through faith in

his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past,

through the forbearance of God; To declare, [I say], at this time his

righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth

in Jesus."

Paul asserts that the "righteousness of God without the law [of Moses] is manifested,

being witnessed by the law and the prophets." Thus, there is absolutely no inconsistency

between the Old and New Testaments. However, it is clear from what Paul states here

that we are not under the Old Testament law: "Therefore by the deeds of the law there

shall no flesh be justified in his sight." Any attempt to gain salvation thereby is vain.

Indeed, if we could be saved by the Old Testament law, then there would be no reason for

Christ to have died on the cross.

 Paul's argumentation along this line continues through Chapter 11. We urge you

to read it in its entirety. The following typifies the doctrine which the Holy Spirit was

inspiring the apostle Paul to write to the Christians at Rome (Romans 10:1): "Brethren, my

heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. For I bear them

record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being

ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness,

have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ [is] the end of

the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." Paul's assertion here is that a zeal

for God is not enough -- it must be according to the knowledge that "Christ is the end of

the law." Since Jesus fulfilled it for us, our attempts to satisfy God by obedience to the

Old Testament law is an appeal to our own sense of righteousness, not that of God.

2.2.3.2 GALATIANS

 The confusion between Old and New Testaments was the major reason for Paul

writing to the churches of Galatia. He expressed his concern early in the letter (Gal. 1:6-9):

"I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ

unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there

be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an

angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached

unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach

any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."

 Paul could have been talking about any perversion of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The remainder of chapter 1 and chapter 2 were dedicated to validating Paul's authority as

an apostle. (This was essential if the letter were to be believed as being authoritative).

However, once he completed this, he returns to the specific perversion which had

motivated him to write the verses given above (Gal. 3:1-5):

"O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth,

before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified

among you? This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the

works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? having

begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? Have ye suffered

so many things in vain? if [it be] yet in vain. He therefore that ministereth

to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, [doeth he it] by the

works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?"   It is clear that there were some 


Jewish converts who were attempting to get their fellow Christians to return to 


the practices of the Old Testament.

 Paul's argumentation along this line continues through chapters 3 and 4. Along

the way he dealt with the question of the role that the law played: "Wherefore then

[serveth] the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to

whom the promise was made" (Gal. 3:19). Thus, the provisions of the law would be

removed once "the seed should come." The seed, of course, was Christ (Gal. 3:16): "Now

to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many;

but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ."

 Paul uses the word faith to refer to the entire system of faith in Christ Jesus, i.e., the

gospel of Jesus Christ. Again discussing the duration of the Old Testament law (Gal. 3:23-

29): "But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which

should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster

[to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that 13

faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. For ye are all the

children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been

baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek,

there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all

one in Christ Jesus. And if ye [be] Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and

heirs according to the promise."

Once again, see how tightly coupled the cessation of binding of the Old Testament law is

to the entry into the church of all races, nations, or any other division between Christians.

 Some of the most definitive verses which condemn the regression to the Old

Testament are in Galatians 5:2-12:

"Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you

nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a

debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you,

whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we

through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Jesus

Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith

which worketh by love. Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye

should not obey the truth? This persuasion [cometh] not of him that calleth

you. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. I have confidence in you

through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that

troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be. And I, brethren, if

I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? then is the

offence of the cross ceased. I would they were even cut off which trouble

you."

  Consider the following with regard to this most definitive set of verses:

1. Paul was not teaching against circumcision per se (see 1 Cor. 7:18-19); he was teaching

against the binding of circumcision by those who wanted to force all Christians to

observe the Old Testament (recall Acts 15).

2. Apparently they were just starting at circumcision and acting like they were not going

to bind anything else. However, from Acts 15:5, it was clear that they had in mind

to bind the entire law of Moses.

3. Paul makes it clear that consistency demands that you cannot pick and choose what you

want even from that which was once bound on God's people. No practice within

the Old Testament was wrong in and of itself, and therefore men are still free to

practice those things as individual traditions. However, when they bind them on

their fellow Christians they fall under some of the harshest condemnation 14

pronounced in the New Testament.

4. Those who would go back under an inferior law have made the sacrifice of Jesus on the

cross a valueless act: "Christ is become of no effect unto you."

5. Those who believe that it is impossible to fall from grace must make an exception here,

since Paul said: "ye are fallen from grace." This certainly shows the condemnation

of those who would legislate for God.

6. "I would they were even cut off which trouble you" is a rather mild way of translating

the underlying Greek text. Literally it means that Paul wished that they would

mutilate themselves. Some interpret it "go beyond circumcision." This could have

a wide variety of meanings, and it is one of Paul's scriptures of which Peter may

have said "are some things hard to be understood" (1 Pet. 3;16). The meaning

could range from Paul's wish that the false teachers would totally expose their

position by going beyond their binding of circumcision to bind the entire law; in

this way they would not be so apt to deceive. The other extreme is that Paul

actually wished them to literally, physically mutilate themselves -- which is

unlikely.

  Regardless of the interpretation of the last verse of this passage, the meaning is quite

clear. The binding of any part of the Old Testament law upon Christians under the

present dispensation violates God's will and causes the perpetrators to fall from grace.

2.2.3.3 COLOSSIANS

 The church at Colosse apparently had the same problem as those of Galatia. In the

following passage of scripture the apostle Paul uses the term circumcision figuratively.

Recognize that circumcision was that ritual which legally converted a male gentile to be

recognized as a Jew. Similarly, the male Jewish child that was circumcised on the eighth

day of his life was then recognized to have met the requirements which God had

established for him to qualify as being a citizen of "God's chosen people." In addition, the

removal of the foreskin was also considered to be a type of cleansing and separation from

the rest of the world.

 With this in mind we can understand what Paul was trying to communicate in

Colossians 2:8-15:

"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the

tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For

in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are

complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: In whom 15

also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in

putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with [him] through

the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And

you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he

quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting

out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary

to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; [And] having spoiled

principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing

over them in it."

  The substitution of the Old Testament law for Christ demeans the One in whom "dwelleth

all the fullness of the Godhead bodily," who is the "head of all principality and power."

The circumcision not made with hands that Christians are subject to is baptism. Baptism

is that single act which puts the alien into Christ (Romans 6:3), which is analogous to

circumcision putting the alien gentile into the Jewish nation.

   A second figure is employed by the apostle as he speaks of the law as being a

"handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us." In fact, it

could not save us without the life of Christ which fulfilled it; and once He fulfilled it He

"took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross." What more definitive terms could be used

to indicate that it is no longer binding on us?

 After this, Paul goes on to further illustrate some of the things under the Old

Testament law that they were being deceived into observing as matters of faith (Col. 2:16-

23): "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of

the new moon, or of the sabbath [days] ... why, as though living in the world, are ye

subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the

using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men? Which things have indeed a show

of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honor to

the satisfying of the flesh."

 The regression of Christians back to the Old Testament law reflected the wisdom

of man, not the wisdom of God. God's wisdom is totally manifested in Christ and the

fulfillment of the law. That which is fulfilled does not need to be fulfilled again.

2.2.3.4 HEBREWS

 Those familiar with the New Testament might question why we did not start with

this letter which has the differentiation of the Old and New Testaments as its major

concern. We thought it best to demonstrate the breadth and clarity of the scriptural

evidence before getting into this more abstract treatment. 16

 As its name implies, this letter was written to that part of the nation of the Jews

who had been converted to Christ. They were the ones who had particular problem in

recognizing that their traditional religious practices were no longer binding (despite their

being allowed on an individual basis). Can you imagine changing all of your religious

practices? Can you imagine the shock of those whose status and authority depended

upon their position within the synagogue? While we often condemn the Jews for their

inflexibility, perhaps we can sympathize with them in this regard. Indeed, Hebrews

presents the same type of challenge to the denominations that the apostles presented to

the Jews. We expect the very same reaction.

 From the very beginning of the letter to the Hebrews we find the writer

emphasizing the superiority of the revelation which came through Jesus Christ (Hebrews

1:1-2): "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the

fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [his] Son, whom he

hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds." The remainder of

Chapter 1 is dedicated to demonstrating the extent to which Jesus, the son of God, was

superior to all created beings, including those who were perceived to be the most exalted

-- angels.

 After demonstrating the superiority of the messenger, he concludes (Heb. 2:1-4):

"Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have

heard, lest at any time we should let [them] slip. For if the word spoken by

angels was steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a

just recompense of reward; How shall we escape, if we neglect so great

salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was

confirmed unto us by them that heard [him]; God also bearing [them]

witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of

the Holy Spirit, according to his own will?"

  The "word spoken through angels" is referring to the diverse revelations of the Old

Testament. The Hebrews knew that under the Old Testament law "every transgression

and disobedience received a just recompense of reward" even with the inferior

messengers. Now that God has spoken through His own son, "How shall we escape if we

neglect so great salvation?"

 Note further how this salvation was revealed. It was first spoken by the Lord

himself when He was on this earth. The He sent the Holy Spirit to complete the

revelation once the principles of the death, burial and resurrection could be fully

understood historically. Recall our discussion of John 14 and 15 in Section 2.2.1. This

revelation was confirmed by miracles to prove that it was, in fact, from God and not just a

fabrication of some religious leader. 17

 The remainder of Chapter 2 shows how Jesus became a perfect sacrifice for our sins

by the things which He suffered. Chapter 3 shows the superiority of the revelation of

Christ over that of Moses (Heb. 3:3): "For this [man] was counted worthy of more glory

than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honor than the

house." There is a clear statement here that to go back under the law as given by Moses

will dishonor Christ. Chapter 3 goes on to give a stern warning that Christians can fall

just as those of Moses' time fell.

 Note how this warning focuses on our faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ, as we

read in Hebrews 4:1-2: "Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left [us] of entering into

his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. For unto us was the gospel preached,

as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with

faith in them that heard [it]." The warning goes on through Chapter 4, which concludes

with the following (4:14-16): "Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed

into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast [our] profession. For we have not

an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all

points tempted like as [we are, yet] without sin. Let us therefore come boldly unto the

throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need."

 The assertion that Jesus is now our high priest is a major departure from the Old

Testament. In fact, Jesus did not qualify to be a priest according to the law of Moses, since

the priests had to be from the tribe of Levi and Jesus was from the tribe of Judah. This is a

major point that the Hebrews writer deals with next.

 The difference between those high priests taken from among men and the Son of

God is the subject of Chapter 5, where the Hebrews writer introduces the legal precedent

by which Jesus could be a high priest. The precedent goes back before the law of Moses to

a priest who served Abraham. His name was Melchizedek. Speaking of Jesus, the

Hebrews writer states (Heb. 5:8-10): "Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by

the things which he suffered; And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal

salvation unto all them that obey him; Called of God an high priest after the order of

Melchizedek." Question: who did Jesus become the author of eternal salvation to? Was it

to those who obey Moses or the prophets? or was it to "all them that obey" Jesus?

 This appeal to a precedent demonstrates the great respect that the Hebrews writer

had for the word of God as written in the Old Testament. The assertion that Jesus was

now our High Priest would seem to be reasonable and acceptable to Christians. But the

writer is trying to show to those who were attempting to impose that Old Testament that

it was that very document that provided the evidence that were are no longer to be subject

to it. Please keep this in mind as we continue our summary of this wonderful letter.

 If this argumentation seems tedious, the Hebrews writer anticipated at this point 18

that it would be to many. He chastises them for becoming dull of hearing and for not

taking their rightful position as teachers, since they had certainly been Christians long

enough to have mastered these truths. But instead, they did not even understand the

milk of the word. He goes on in the remainder of Chapter 6 and into Chapter 7 to further

explain these concepts. He concludes Chapter 7 with the following (Hebrews 7:26-28):

"For such an high priest became us, [who is] holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from

sinners, and made higher than the heavens; Who needeth not daily, as those high priests,

to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once,

when he offered up himself. For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity;

but the word of the oath, which was since the law, [maketh] the Son, who is consecrated

for evermore."

 In Section 2.2.1, we introduced the concept above that Jesus could not reveal all of

the truth while still on this earth. Certain things had to be accomplished by his death,

burial, resurrection and ascension into heaven. This is confirmed by the Hebrews writer

in Hebrews 8:4-7: "For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are

priests that offer gifts according to the law: Who serve unto the example and shadow of

heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the

tabernacle: for, See, saith he, [that] thou make all things according to the pattern showed

to thee in the mount." The principle here is quite clear -- when God gives us a pattern we

have no choice but to follow it until that point when God sets it aside. Even Jesus himself

could not assume the role of High Priest as long as the Old Testament law was in effect.

As we saw above in our discussion of Colossians 2: 8-15, it was His death on the cross that

also caused the "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which

was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross."

 The Hebrews writer further explains how a better covenant supersedes the Old

Testament laws (Hebrews 8:6-7): "But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by

how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better

promises. For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then should no place have been

sought for the second." He continues to explain that the fault was not with the covenant

but with those who would not follow it. The he quotes another Old Testament passage

which clearly states that a New Covenant, or New Testament, would be established:

Jeremiah 31:31-34. Finally he states it in absolutely no uncertain terms (Hebrews 8:13): "In

that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and

waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away." Remnants of Old Testament worship was still

being maintained by the Jews in the first century. However, with the destruction of

Jerusalem in AD 70, the temple was destroyed and never rebuilt, making total compliance

with the Old Testament impossible.

 Lest we think that the Hebrews writer is not talking about worship under the Law

of Moses, Chapter 9 is dedicated to a detailed description of exactly what he meant. Each 19

Old Testament detail is described as a part of the shadow that has now become reality in

the revelation of the gospel of Christ. Note that often we speak of the New Testament as

being more spiritually oriented and the Old Testament being more of an appeal to the

physical aspects of man. This is true, and it demonstrates that the physical aspects of this

life are the shadows -- the dark projections from objects that block the light. Reality is

revealed by viewing these objects in the light of the New Testament.

 Chapters 9 and 10 present a detailed contrast between the priesthood of Christ and

the Old Testament law. Integrated into this is a detailed interpretation of Jeremiah 31:31-

34. The eleventh chapter provides a clear definition of exactly what the bible means when

it uses the word faith. It also clearly demonstrates that God has always required the same

type of faith from all men and women of all times. The only thing that has changed is the

particular law that we are under.

 This rather large section of the chapter has provided but a small sample of the

evidence within the bible which demonstrates that today we are under the New

Testament. The next section will show, however, that the Old Testament is still essential

to understanding the New Testament. A final section presents the reasons that all of this

is important.

2.3 THE TRUTHFULNESS AND VALUE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT

 There is absolutely not one verse in the New Testament that indicates that the Old

Testament is not totally true, or that it should not be believed today. Recall again where

Jesus said "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to

destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle 

shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matthew 5:17-18). Jesus believed in 

the validity of the Old Testament, and so should we. 

 Does this sound strange? Can we believe something to be true without believing

that we are subject to it? Of course! We believe that Adam was told not to eat of the

forbidden fruit, but we are not under that law. We understand that Noah was

commanded to build an arc, but we do not build arcs today. God requires the same faith

or us as he did of them (Heb. 11), but today our faith is revealed by obedience to His son.

 Of what value is the Old Testament? First and foremost, it is important because it

is essential to our understanding of the New Testament. The Old Testament is quoted

throughout the New Testament to explain the full meaning of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Without an understanding of the Old Testament, these New Testament passages are

meaningless; thus we cannot understand all of the New Testament unless we have some

basic understanding of the Old Testament. This makes this understanding of and faith in 20

the validity of the Old Testament essential to our salvation today. Christians must

dedicate themselves to a study and understanding of the Old Testament -- not because it

is God's law for us today, but to understand God's law for us today, i.e., the New

Testament. [In case you feel uncomfortable about calling the New Testament God's law

for us today, read 1 Corinthians 9:21, where Paul said that he was "not without law to

God, but under the law to Christ."]

 A second reason that the Old Testament is important is that it contains timeless

knowledge with regard to the nature of both God and man. How can we understand

suffering without the book of Job? How can we sing songs of praise to God without the

book of Psalms? How can we obtain the wisdom of the wisest man whoever lived

without the book of Ecclesiastes? How can we know where we came from without the

book of Genesis? We could go on and on, but Jesus said it best when he said: "It is

written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the

mouth of God" (Matthew 4:4). Every word includes the Old Testament.

 Finally, we know that the Old Testament is a priceless treasure because the New

Testament tells us that it is. In Romans 15:2-4 we read: "Let every one of us please [his]

neighbor for [his] good to edification. For even Christ pleased not himself; but, as it is

written, The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me. For whatsoever things

were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and

comfort of the scriptures might have hope." First, Paul quoted an Old Testament

scripture (Psalms 69:9) as proof that Christ pleased not himself. Then he stated the value

of the Old Testament scriptures ("things ... written aforetime"). They are for our learning

that we might have hope through patience and comfort of the scriptures.

 As a second example, consider the writing of the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 10.

This is a very powerful chapter that many people do not wish to hear. It states

unequivocally that Christians (which implies that they are in a saved, covenant

relationship with God) can be lost just as the Israelites who were saved (out of Egypt) fell

from God's grace. After describing what happened to them in great detail, he stated (1

Corinthians 10:11-12): "Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they

are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. Wherefore

let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall." The Old Testament was written

for our admonition. Remember, God is no respecter of persons. We can clearly and

graphically see that those of old were clearly condemned for their disobedience. Do you

think that we are better than they? On the contrary, "how shall we escape if we neglect so

great a salvation?" (Heb. 2:3).

 So the Old Testament should be believed because it is the truth revealed of God.

Faith in its validation will lead us to conclude that we are not under its edicts today; with

the death of Christ we are under the New Testament. However, the value of the Old

Testament is in enabling us to understand the New Testament, helping us understand the 21

nature of God, helping us to have comfort in hope, and admonishing us to be faithful.

2.3 WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT?

 Let us apply what we have learned immediately above to answer this question. In

Numbers 13 we read about Moses sending spies into the land of Canaan to spy out the

land. It was God's will that they bring back a positive report and have faith in Him to

take the land. However, we read that all but Joshua and Caleb brought back a report

which demonstrated a lack of faith in God. God was extremely displeased with them and

we read in Numbers 14 how he condemned them to spend 40 years in the wilderness, and

that none of the unfaithful would cross over into the promised land. Toward the end of

Chapter 14 we read about these men repenting themselves and deciding indeed to

attempt to take the promised land. It says (Numbers 14:44: "But they presumed to go up

unto the hill top: nevertheless the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and Moses, departed

not out of the camp. Then the Amalekites came down, and the Canaanites which dwelt in

that hill, and smote them, and discomfited them, [even] unto Hormah."

 Timing is everything. Had they demonstrated that zeal a few days before they

would have been blessed by God. These things are written for our admonition ...

 Consider a second example. It is recorded in Exodus 17:6 where Moses was

commanded of god: "Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and

thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink.

And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel." However, a later occasion is

recorded in Numbers 20:10-12: "And Moses and Aaron gathered the congregation

together before the rock, and he said unto them, Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you

water out of this rock? And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he smote the rock

twice: and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts

[also]. And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to

sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this

congregation into the land which I have given them."

 Timing is everything. Moses could have argued that God had previously

commanded him to strike the rock. What was wrong with that now? Moses could have,

but he had more sense than to do such a foolish thing. Moses and Aaron both knew what

they had done wrong -- they had not trusted God.

 Today when we practice and bind the Old Testament rather than the gospel of

Jesus Christ, it demonstrates that very same lack of faith in God. Is it important? Ask

Moses. 

Go to the next chapter