Dr Greg Bahnsen - Normative Ethics: Continuity and Discontinuity between OT and NT (Part 13)

Given our previous presentation of the Law of God and its current normativity for the Christian believer today, one might be led to think that the Old Testament is not viewed as old by theonomists in any sense at all, or any significant sense. And it's necessary now, having spoken of all the continuity between the Old and New Testaments with respect to moral standards, to address this question of discontinuity between the covenants as well. That discontinuity is equally crucial to a proper biblical outlook on a question of morality in the course of history. I want to affirm from the very outset that theonomists believe that there are changes between Old and New Testaments, that there are crucial changes between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. And theonomists insist that we are New Covenant believers, that our attempt and willingness to follow the Old Testament law comes precisely from our endorsement of the New Covenant and the terms of the New Covenant. We believe that the New Covenant itself points us to the validity of God's Old Testament law as an abiding moral standard for God's people in all ages. That's why we endorse that continuity. Nevertheless, as New Covenant believers, we rejoice in the changes that have come about in the transition from the administration of the covenant of grace under the Old Order to the administration of that covenant under the New. We rejoice that we no longer live in an age of anticipation, but now an age of realization of God's promises. I want to take some time to elaborate upon our appreciation of that discontinuity between the covenants. I'm going to do it in four basic theses, all these theses pointing to discontinuity between the covenants with respect to the Law of God in some way or another. After we do that, we'll take some time to survey and summarize pages 57 and following in our ethics syllabus written by Mr. Frame, because in that section he deals with the gospel and law in redemptive history and the whole question of Old and New Covenant and the divisions of the Law and the changes that have been made in the New Covenant as well. So I want this material integrated. However, my presentation will be in terms of theses about discontinuity, and then we'll make some random remarks and try to summarize what he has presented in the syllabus as well. My first thesis is that the New Covenant surpasses the Old Covenant in glory. The New Covenant is far more glorious than is the Old Covenant. The first sub point under that is, that while the Old Covenant was fundamentally a ministration of condemnation and death, the New Covenant is a ministration of righteousness and life. The Old Covenant was fundamentally a ministration of condemnation and death, while the New Covenant is a ministration of righteousness and life. In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul reflects on the distinctiveness of the New Covenant, attempting to prove to anyone who exalts the law over the Gospel, as was being done by the legalistic Judaizers, anyone who is so absorbed in the commandments that he obscures and overlooks the good news of redemption. Paul wants to prove to such a person that he has made a grave mistake. For the New Covenant, Paul teaches, far outshines in glory the law of the Old Covenant. Now he does say that the law certainly has its glory, 2 Corinthians 3:9, 11. For if the ministration of condemnation hath glory, much rather doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. He says that the law had its glory. For if that which passes away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory. So Paul insists that the law certainly has its glory. But despite that glory, what stands out in the Old Covenant is the feature of condemnation bringing death, Chapter three, Verses six seven, nine who also made it sufficient as ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter, but of the Spirit. For the letter kills as the Spirit gives life. But if the ministration of death, written and engraved on stones, came with glory, and then he continues his argument, verse 9. For if the ministration of condemnation hath glory, much rather this administration of righteousness exceeding so although there is a glory to the law, that glory in the old covenant you remember that what accompanies that glory is the feature of condemnation bringing death. The law is good indeed, the law was ordained unto life. However, the sinfulness of man works through that good law to produce death. According to Paul in Romans 7, the outstanding feature of the Old Covenant, to Paul's mind, was the external tables of law, which, although they commanded very good things to be done, could not confer those good things. These external ordinances necessarily condemned all unrighteous men and demanded their death. And so Paul could say very bluntly, in 2 Corinthians 3, 6, the letter kills. There is no way that sinful man can be justified by doing the law. When Moses returned from receiving the law, his face shone with the glory of God. After reading the law of the people, he needed to put a veil over his face for the sake of the people, 2 Corinthians 3, 7, 13. It's quite clear that this is for their sake that Moses did it. But if the ministration of death written engraved on stones came with glory, so that the children of Israel could not look steadfastly upon the face of Moses for the glory of his face, and in verse 13, and are not as Moses who put a veil upon his face, that the children of Israel should not look steadfastly on the end of that which was passing away the old covenant law condemned and killed until the people couldn't look upon it. But by contrast, Christ takes away the curse of the law by enduring its penalty, gives his life producing spirit to create an obedient heart in all of us. Accordingly, the new covenant is distinctively called a ministration of the Spirit, or a ministration of righteousness, which verse 6 in chapter 3 says imparts life. The letter kills if the Spirit imparts life. Christ has done what the law weakened by the flesh could not do. Romans 8, 3. And accordingly Paul says that in contrast to the covenant epitomized by tables of stone, the new covenant exceeds in glory. So the old covenant law commanded good things, but only the gospel could fully confer those good things. The righteousness demanded by the law was only supplied with the redemptive work of Jesus Christ. Well, the law itself gave a genuine glory through stone tables, but required that the Son of God come, that grace and truth might be realized. So Cowley in his commentary says the law, however glorious in itself, has no glory in the face of the gospel's grandeur. As such, the approach of the new covenant believer to God's law is significantly different the approach that of the old covenant believer. Since the threat of the law has now been decisively removed through the expiation offered by Christ and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the law can be more fully a delight to the believer and less of a threat. Well, we can add to this that we said the new covenant surpasses the old and glory. We can add that the new covenant provides the believer with a greater confidence now in approaching God. A greater confidence. The old covenant law had promised forgiveness to the sinner on the basis of animal sacrifices. But the tentativeness of this arrangement was evident from the fact that mere animals were offered up and from the fact that sacrifices were repeated over and over and over again. Hebrews 10 brings out both of these arguments. There was still a distance between the believer and God for notice that the high priest only could come before the very presence of God in the holiest place, and that only once a year a veil, you see, separated the people from their God. But with the sacrificial work of Christ which cleanses New Covenant believers, the veil has been torn in two. Remember how Mark relates chapter 15, that at the crucifixion Christ the veil of the temple was rent. Through Christ the Mediator of the New Covenant we have bold access to the throne of grace. The way into the Holy place was not manifest under the Old Covenant, but under the New Covenant we have boldness to enter into the Holy place by the blood of Jesus. The assurance of forgiveness, the purity of the believer, and the nearness of God are greater in the New Covenant than anything the Old Covenant Law could secure. And so Calvin very properly remarked, the person who still holds to or wishes to restore the shadows of the law not only obscures the glory of Christ, but also deprives us of a tremendous blessing in that he puts a distance between us and God to approach whom freedom has been granted us by the Gospel. We rejoice that we're not Old Testament believers because we now have a nearness to God, confidence in approaching God that was not present under the Old Testament law. As a third sub point about the surpassing glory of the New Covenant, we can say that unlike the Old Covenant, the New Covenant has a permanent and unfading glory. Back in 2nd Corinthians 3, where Paul likens the glory of the Old Covenant with its law to the glory which shone in Moses face after receiving the Law, Paul repeats over and over again that this glory was fading or passing away, verses 7, 11 and 13. He says also this glory had to be veiled. But the New Covenant has a transforming glory that is seen in the face of Jesus Christ, 2nd Corinthians 3, 18, 2 Corinthians 4 4. But we all with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror, the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit, in whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving. That the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn upon them seeing it is God that said light should shine out of darkness, who shined in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. The New Covenant has a transforming glory then seen in the face of Christ, and this glory is beheld with an unveiled face, permanently and progressively making us over into the same image as Paul says, from glory to glory. Moses mirrored the glory of God only intermittently and with a fading glory. Such was the excellence of the Old Covenant Law. We, on the other hand, constantly mirror the unfading glory of Christ, who is the very image of God. Indeed, as Romans 5 says, we rejoice in our hope of sharing the glory of God. Distinctive to the New Covenant, then, is a glory that surpasses the Law, a glory which can be gazed upon as well as mirrored without interruption. So what we have found, then, is that the New Testament writers can set the New Covenant over against the Old Covenant by taking the Law as their point of departure. Believers today have greater benefits than Old Covenant believers could have in their relationship to the Law. The Law stood for threatening and death. It stood for God being at some distance, and it represented a fading glory. But in the New Covenant the threat is removed, God draws nearer and the glory is permanent. And that provides us with a different context within which to use the law of God. And it determines the attitude with which we must approach the Law. The New Covenant puts the Law in proper perspective. Any questions about the surpassing glory of the New Covenant? My second premise is going to be the New Covenant surpasses the Old Covenant in power. Now. Not only is the New Covenant more glorious, it is more powerful. By way of explanation, let's notice first that the New Covenant provides us with further and with stronger motivations to obey the Law. The New Covenant provides us with further and with stronger motivations to obey the Law. Everything found in Scripture is written for our instruction in righteousness, for our spiritual discipline. So says Paul in 2 Timothy 3, 16, 17. Indeed, we cannot be perfectly furnished into all good works without paying attention to all the aspects of scriptural revelation. We have to pay attention to its history, its promises, its wisdom, its prayers, its praise, and all the rest. Each of these functions equips us in some way to better pursue righteous living. The New Covenant provides us with further Scriptures. Quite obviously, these further Scriptures tell us of God's redemptive work, the accomplishment and the application of that redemption. And as such, these further Scriptures serve to make us extra ever more grateful for what God has done. Redemption, the new creation, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the unity of the Body of Christ. These and many more themes in the New Covenant's revelation are motivations for godliness which were not present for Old Testament saints. The Old Testaments didn't have the accomplishment of redemption, the New Creation, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. In the Pentecostal, they didn't have the unity of the Body of Christ. So we have motivations today that go beyond the motivations available to Old Covenant saints. Many ethical exhortations in the New Covenant, you'll find, are commonly founded on the consideration of these new benefits that were not available to Old Testament saints. So my first point is that we have further motivation, stronger motivation to obey the law today. I want to add as a second sub point here that unlike the Old Covenant Law, the New Covenant empowers obedience to the revealed pattern of righteousness. The Old Covenant Law did not empower, but the New Covenant Law does. We look again at 2 Corinthians 3, where Paul contrasts the Old Covenant with the New. We read that Paul's New Covenant ministry had the effect of changing the hearts of his hearers as though Christ himself had written upon their hearts. 2nd Corinthians 3:3 being made manifest that you are an epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God, not in tables of stone, but in the tables that are the hearts and flesh. God had written the law with his own finger upon two tables of stone at Mount Sinai. But Jeremiah looked forward to a day, the day of the New Covenant, when God's law would now be written upon men's hearts. Jeremiah 31:33 hearts that would be made of responsive flesh According to Ezekiel 11 rather than hearts of stone. Whereas the proverb teaches us that out of the heart are the issues of life, with the law written upon man's heart, he would finally be able to walk in God's commandments and do them. Although the Spirit worked in the lives of Old Covenant believers to help them obey the law of God, he did so in a way which was both limited and provisional. Looking ahead to the great day of Pentecostal power, Paul in 2 Corinthians 3 notes that the Spirit is the agent of the writing done upon the New Covenant believer's heart. A letter of the Old Covenant brought death with the Spirit of the New Covenant communicates life and righteousness. What was once external and accusing is now internal and activated. The law made Nothing perfect, Hebrews 7:19 says, but the new and the better covenant has better promises, in particular the promise of internalization of the law by means of Christ's sacrifice and priestly work, so that now the law will be kept, Hebrews 8:6 10. Hebrews 86 but now hath he obtained a ministry the more excellent by so much as he is also the mediator of a better covenant, which hath been enacted upon better promises. For if that first covenant has been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second but finding fault with them, he said. And then he quotes Jeremiah here in the promise of the New Covenant The Eternal Covenant makes us perfect in every good work to do God's will, according to Hebrews 13:20 21. So here we find one of the most dramatic differences between the Old Covenant Law and the New Covenant Gospel. The New Covenant accomplishes what the law required but gave no ability to perform. Philip Edgcomb Hughes expressed the point in this way in his commentary on the Epistle to the the fault of the Old Covenant law lay not in its essence, which, as we have said, presented God's standard of righteousness and was propounded as an instrument of life to those who should keep it. But in its inability to justify and renew, those who fail failed to keep it, namely the totality of fallen mankind. The New Covenant went literally to the heart of the matter, promising man as it did, a new and obedient heart and the grace truly to love God and his fellow man. Already we've seen two tremendously significant discontinuities between the Old and the New Covenant regarding the Law of God. The first is that the New Covenant surpasses the Old Covenant in glory, and the second is that the New Covenant surpasses the Old Covenant in power. My points being that in the New Covenant we have further motivation for obedience and we have empowering enablement to obey the Law, whereas the Old Covenant Law didn't provide that. Any questions on that? A third form of discontinuity that we can add to our discussion. This is extremely important. The New Covenant reality supersedes the Old Covenant shadows. The New Covenant reality supersedes the Old Covenant shadows. We're going to discuss this under two important points. First, the New Covenant secures redemption that is foreshadowed. And secondly, the New Covenant redefines the people of the covenant, the people of God. First of all, the New Covenant secures the redemption foreshadowed in the Old Covenant. One of the greatest points of dissimilarity between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant is found in the area of redemptive rituals, for instance the Old Testament sacrifices, priesthood, temple covenant signs, and the like. The way in which the laws pertaining to such redemptive ritual were observed prior to the coming of Christ is much different than the way in which they are observed today. By bringing in the substance that is foreshadowed in the Old Covenant and realizing the hope that was anticipated in the Old Covenant. The New Covenant gives us a new perspective on the laws which regulated expiation and priestly service and such things. Whereas the Old Covenant believer looked ahead to the work of the Savior, the Old Covenant believer showed faith by observing the redemptive ritual of the Old Covenant. The New Covenant believer looks back upon the finished work of the Savior and shows faith by clinging to him for salvation totally apart from the Old Covenant ceremonies. From Scripture alone it is evident that the New Covenant arrangement is better than the Old Covenant pertaining to redemption, and accordingly those redemptive laws have been made outwardly inoperative today. That is a discontinuity between the covenants which can be suppressed only at the cost of totally misunderstanding the teaching of the New Testament. The logic of the writer of Hebrews is that if a new covenant has been given, then it must be a better covenant, which as such makes the Old Covenant outmoded. Moses himself witnessed to the provisionary glory of the administration of God's grace found in the Pentateuch by looking beyond the shadow promised to the realization to come. Hebrews 3:5 at the end of the verse, Hebrews 3:5. Well, the whole verse reads, moses was faithful in all his house as a servant for a testimony of those things which were afterward to be spoken. Likewise Jeremiah spoke for God of a new covenant to come. And that very fact, according to the author of Hebrews, indicated that already the Mosaic administration was deemed obsolete in passing away and ready to vanish. Hebrews 8:13. In that he saith, a new covenant he hath made the first old but that which is becoming old and waxing aged is nigh vanishing away. And so Jeremiah says, the very fact that God back then called it a new covenant indicated that right then the old was passing away and was becoming obsolete. In saying this leads the author of Hebrews right into a discussion of the first covenant's ritual ordinances. And throughout chapter nine of the book of Hebrews at the very end of chapter eight, he speaks of the old passing away. And then he explains this. All of chapter nine deals with the ritual ordinances of the Old Covenant law. The work of Christ, you see, is called superior to those ritual ordinances. The work of Christ is not called superior to the moral law of God. Christ is the surety of a better covenant and a better hope, according to Hebrews 7:22 19 and this is because the priesthood of Christ is everlasting, because the sacrifice of himself is totally efficacious. You see, the very repetition of the Old Covenant sacrifice is demonstrated that they were temporary, that they were imperfect. The superiority of Christ's ministry over the Old Covenant's Levitical ministry is found in the fact that Christ Christ's priestly work is exercised in the true heavenly tabernacle rather than in the earthly shadowy one. Hebrews 8:2.5 presents that argument. Christ operates in the heavenly tabernacle rather than the earthly one, and that makes his work superior. The priestly work carried out in the earthly tabernacle was but figurative or anticipatory. Hebrews 9, verse 19 for when every commandment had been spoken by Moses unto all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and the goats, and the water scarlet and wool of hyssop, and sprinkle both the brook itself and all the people. This was anticipating, you see, the sacrifice of Christ himself that would have to come. Christ ministry is the realization carried on in a greater tabernacle in heaven. Hebrews 9, 9 tells us that all the matters of the first tabernacle were a figure for the time present were a figure for the time present, according to which are offered both gifts and sacrifices that could not make the worshipper perfect. The price now comes as the realization of that symbol or figure. The Levitical ritual of the Old Covenant revealed by Moses was parabolic of the present order in the New Covenant. In themselves, the priestly rituals of the old covenant could not perfect the conscience as Christ now perfects the conscience, and thus they were necessarily temporary used until the time that everything is made right, being only with meats and drinks and divers washings, carnal ordinances imposed until a time of reformation. So the Bible itself tells us that these were shadows, parables, symbols, figures, if you will, to be used only until the time in which all things were made right. The Old Covenant saints greeted the promises of God from afar, Says Hebrews in But by contrast, Christ fulfills the promises and secures redemption for us the promised inheritance, and grants transforming power to us by his saving work. The redemptive rituals of the Old Testament law then, could not perfect the believer. They were only a shadow of the good things to come. That's the explicit conclusion of Hebrews 10. 1. For the law having a shadow of the good things to come come not the very image of the things can never with the same sacrifices, make perfect those who draw none. Accordingly, the accomplished work of the Redeemer now being in the past, we no longer use or apply the Old Covenant laws that regulated the sacrifices, the priesthood, and all that. We no longer use those laws in the same way we don't follow the parable or the shadow or the figure. We follow the reality that was anticipated. And so discontinuity of a very radical sort is to be observed. And it's precisely the word of God that instructs us to see an altered application of those laws. Indeed, the word of God warns us against reverting back to the imperfection of that outmoded administration of God's grace in the Old Testament Levitical system. It's not surprising then, that the earliest Christians were accused of opposing the temple in the Mosaic walls rituals. The New Covenant Word teaches that some of God's Old Covenant ordinances were not intended to be continuously observed in the same manner throughout the history of redemption. With the coming of the Savior and his perfect priestly work, necessarily the Levitical priesthood has been changed. Hebrews 7:12. For the priesthood being changed there is made of necessity a change also of the law. Notice that this is of necessity that the laws change. What kind of necessity? A necessity dictated by the Old Testament law itself. The Old Testament law was by its very nature a shadow of the good things to come. And so, of necessity, the priesthood had to change. When the true priest of God prophesied in the Old Testament, came and offered the once for all sacrifice for us, when the reality appeared, the shadows had to be put away, and hence the sacrifices. The feasts of the old order are not binding upon the believer today in their shadow forms. You might want to compare here the language of Paul in Colossians 2, 1317. And you being dead through your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, you, I say, did he make alive with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and all that, we no longer use those laws. In the same way, we don't follow the parable or the shadow or the figure. We follow the reality that was anticipated. And so discontinuity of a very radical sort is to be observed. And it's precisely the word of God that instructs us to see an altered application of those laws. Indeed, the word of God warns us against reverting back to to the imperfection of that outmoded administration of God's grace in the Old Testament Levitical system. It's not surprising then, that the earliest Christians were accused of opposing the temple and the Mosaic wall's rituals. The New Covenant Word teaches that some of God's Old Covenant ordinances were not intended to be continuously observed in the same manner throughout the history of redemption. With the coming of the Savior and his perfect priestly work, necessarily the Levitical priesthood has been changed. Hebrews 7:12. For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. Notice that this is of necessity that the law is changed. What kind of necessity? A necessity dictated by the Old Testament law itself. The Old Testament law was by its very nature a shadow of the good things to come. And so of necessity, the priesthood had to change. When the true priest of God prophesied in the Old Testament, came and offered the once for all sacrifice for us, when the reality appeared, the shadows had to be put away, and hence the sacrifices. The feast of the Old Order are not binding upon the believer today in their shadow forms. You might want to compare here the language of Paul in Colossians 2, 13, 17. And you being dead through your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, you, I say, did he make alive with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and hath taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross, having despoiled the principalities and the powers, he made a show of them, openly triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat or drink, or in respect to feast day, or new moon or sabbath, which are a shadow of the things to come. But the body, the reality, the subject substance, is Christ. And so today we observe these ordinances in Christ, the reality, rather than according to the shadow forms of the Old Covenant order. Now, something I want to stress again here is that this change, so that we don't keep the Levitical priesthood or the temple ritual, the sacrificial system, this change is dictated by God's own word. It's not something that we imaginatively read into the Scriptures, not something that we apply by some kind of creative, aesthetic scheme of thought, some picture that we want to draw, but rather this is an application of change or a changed application of the law. Is what I want to say, based on the teaching of God's own Word. We do not observe the Old Testament shape because God's Word tells us that these were shadows. So the New Covenant reality supersedes the Old Covenant shadows. And in the first place we have seen this because the New Covenant secures the redemption that was but foreshadowed as a good thing to come, was but foreshadowed in the Old Covenant the second way in which we see the New Covenant reality superseding the Old Covenant shadows is in the fact that the New Covenant redefines the covenant people of God. The New Covenant redefines the covenant people of God. Under the Old Covenant order, Israel was constituted as a nation and adopted as the people of God. But under the New Covenant, the people of God turns out to be an international body comprised of those who have faith in Jesus Christ. The Bible tells us in the New Testament that the kingdom has been taken away from the Jews and the Church is now the Israel of God. Galatians 6:15. The church is now the commonwealth of Israel. Ephesians 2:12. It is now the kingdom of priests. 1st Peter Peter 2:9. It is the twelve tribes of the dispersion. James 1:1 and 1st Peter 1:1. The church is now the seed of Abraham. Galatians 3, verses 7 and 29. Indeed, faithful Israel of Old is included within one household of God that comprises the church. Hebrews 3, verses 1 to 6 Israelites and Gentiles are presented by Paul in Romans 11 as separate branches of one olive tree of faith. Thus, the New Testament church in Acts 15 is called the Restoration of Israel. And the New Covenant, which was originally made with Israel and Judah, is actually now established with the apostles who are foundational for the Church. So this biblically grounded redefinition of the people of God brings with it some corresponding alterations in the application of the Old Testament law. What I'm saying is we must see that the people of God in the New Covenant, they are redefined. It's no longer the Jews, but now the church. And just because of that redefinition of the people of God, certain laws of the Old Testament are going to be reapplied, are going to be dealt with in a different way. And I have three illustrations of that difference. First of all, the New Covenant does not define God's people as an earthly nation. The New Covenant does not define God's people as an earthly nation, one nation among others. As a geopolitical entity you see in this world, it does not require as such political loyalty to national Israel as did the old covenant. Philippians 3:10 tells us that our citizenship is in heaven. It is not a part of loyalty, political loyalty to national Israel. Christ's kingdom, unlike the Old Testament, Israel is not to be defended with the sword. When Pilate asked Jesus about the kingdom that he claimed to rule over, Jesus said that his kingdom is not of this world. And that's why his servants do not Fight. Our kingdom is not a geopolitical kingdom that requires the sword. 2 Corinthians 10:4. Paul says, the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but rather spiritual. We use the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, not a physical sword, to defend the kingdom. So that's one application of the redefinition of God's people. Since God's people are not earthly Jerusalem, we don't have to defend earthly Jerusalem with the sword. Secondly, because the significance of Canaan as the promised land of inheritance has passed away with the establishment of the kingdom which it foreshadowed, Old Covenant laws which are directly concerned with the land will find a changed application as well. Galatians 3:16. The passage where Paul says, the promise to Abraham and to his seed after him was a promise made specifically to Christ. Now to Abraham were the promises spoken, and to his seed he saith, not unto seeds as of many, but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ. The promise made to Abraham was a promise made to Christ. The promise of the land of Palestine was a promise that is fulfilled in Christ. So that it's not without significance that Hebrews 11:8 10 tells us, by faith, Abraham, when he was called, obeyed to go out into a place which he was to receive for an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing whither he went. By faith he became a sojourner in the land of promise, as in a land not his own, dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him in the same promise. For he looked for the city which has foundations, whose builder and maker is God. You see, Abraham, even though he never possessed the promised land, knew that the fulfillment of this promise was in a heavenly city, the kingdom of Jesus Christ. So in Ephesians 1:14, the New Testament tells us that the Holy Spirit is the down payment. And of course, the down payment is made in like kind with the full payment. The Holy Spirit is the down payment, the initial deposit on the inheritance which belongs to the saints. Paul speaks of the Holy Spirit of promise, which is an earnest a down payment of our inheritance. Now, the inheritance, the promised land, is found in the Holy Spirit, in the kingdom of Jesus Christ. 1st Peter 1:4 draws out a lengthy contrast between the kingdom that was given to the Jews and the realized kingdom that we enjoy as Christians. Jesus Christ has been raised from the dead. Verse 4 says, Unto an inheritance, the very word used of the land of promise in the Old Testament, unto an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled. And it fades not away reserved in heaven for you. We have a new kind of inheritance, not one in the land of Palestine. And this inheritance is reserved in heaven for us. Consequently, with the redefinition of the people of God, there's a passing away of this significance of the land of Canaan as the promised land. Now, the kingdom of Jesus Christ comes as the fulfillment of what was anticipated in the Old Testament promised land. Consequently, any provisions in the law of God having to do with the land of Palestine, for instance, the division of land into family portions, the locations of the city of refuge in the Old Testament, and the levirate institutions which was specifically given to secure a man's inheritance, that it wouldn't pass away from his family, to make sure there'd always be an heir to keep up his plot of ground, his inheritance in the land of promise. These sorts of provisions will have changed application. They will pass away, be set aside because of the changed significance of the land of Palestine. Now, a third implication for the changing of the law, given the change of the definition of God's people, is that the separation from unholy peoples which God required through the dietary laws symbolizing that separation by a separation between clean and unclean meats, that sort of thing will no longer be observed by avoidance of the Gentiles or by abstaining from certain foods. Make it very clear that theonomists don't believe the dietary laws have to be kept today. Leviticus 20, verses 22 to 26 shows us that there's a separation between clean and unclean meat because of the separation that the Jews were to observe between clean and unclean people. Deuteronomy 20:22, 26. I'm sorry. Leviticus 20:22. 26. We'll get that right. Leviticus 20:22. You shall therefore keep all my statutes and all mine ordinances, and do them that the land whither I bring you to dwell therein vomit you not out. And you shall not walk in the customs of the nations which I cast out before. For they did all these things, and therefore I abhorred them. But I have said unto you, you shall inherit their land, and I will give it unto you to possess it. A land flowing with milk and honey. I am Jehovah, your God, who hath separated you from the peoples. God says, you're to keep my law. You're not to walk in the ways of the Gentiles in the land, for I have separated you from them. You're to be a holy people, to walk differently. In verse 25 says, Therefore you shall make a distinction between the clean beast and the unclean, and between the unclean, foul, and the clean. And ye shall not make your souls abominable by beast, or by bird, or by anything wherewith the grand teemoth which I have separated from you as unclean and ye shall be wholly separate unto me. For I Jehovah, am holy, and have set you apart from the peoples that you should be mine. Nothing could be clearer. The Old Testament says the very reason for the dietary laws was to typify the separation between the Jews who kept God's law and the Gentiles who didn't. And that separation between clean and unclean meats is no longer observed today by avoiding the gentiles. In Acts 10, Peter is told to go and preach the gospel to Cornelius, to a Gentile to welcome him into the kingdom. And Peter is shown the appropriateness of this Jew and Gentile being brought together into the kingdom by God, setting down in a dream a large sheet full of unclean meats, and he tells Peter to eat them. Peter, of course, being a godly Jew, says, lord, I've never eaten an unclean thing. I can't do that. And God's declaration is, what I have cleansed. Let no man call unclean. Let nobody today call pork and shrimp unclean, for God has cleansed them. And so Peter goes and he preaches the gospel to Cornelius, because God has taken away the symbolic pedagogical device of showing separation between his people. And that separation is no longer a separation between Jews and Gentiles, the separation between the church and the world. 2 Corinthians 6, 14, 18. Come out from among them and be and touch no unclean thing, says the Lord. Well, that's right in the context of Paul teaching that we shouldn't be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. And so now the separation is of a different sort. And that separation is not taught by pedagogical or symbolical devices, such as not eating certain foods. In Mark 7:19, we read that Jesus made all meats clean. Acts 10:15. God says, what I've cleansed, don't let any man call unclean. Romans 14:17. The kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but rather righteousness and joy in the Holy Spirit. So we see three very significant differences based on the redefinition of God's people in the new covenant. First of all, we don't defend the kingdom with the sword because we don't have loyalty to earthly Jerusalem anymore. Secondly, the significance of the Land of Canaan has passed and the laws tied to that land are changed in application. Thirdly, the separation typified by not eating certain meats, not mixing certain seeds and that sort of thing. Those laws have been changed because now the church is an international body rather than a body separating Jew and Gentile. Any questions on this? The question is whether the dietary laws would be like the whole nation taking something similar to a Nazirite vow. I think that's an interesting suggestion to be pursued, but I really don't have any confidence to answer one way or another. I guess I'm disinflined to say that the Bible presents it in that light, but I'm not sure that it's inappropriate because I haven't studied it out with that thesis in mind. So I suppose it's safest just to say that's interesting. And we'll have to study exegetically some more to see whether the Bible lays it out just that way. Do you want to follow that up? Well, already we see that theonomists are not these iron clad this idea of ironclad continuity and permanence between the Old Testament. They don't hold to this idea that there's no way that you can change the Old Testament law. Far from it. Theodorists believe that the New Covenant surpasses the Old Covenant in glory, surpasses the New Covenant in power, surpasses the Old Covenant shadows as well. We praise God for the changes that have taken place. We don't prevent the kingdom with the sword. We aren't tied to the land of Canaan and the laws pertaining to it, or to the dietary laws and other laws of separation. The fourth way in which we can see the change between Old and New Covenants is that the New Covenant surpasses the Old Covenant in finality. Very briefly, we can say that it surpasses the Old Covenant law in clarity without giving with the giving. Excuse me, with the giving of further relevant information in the scriptures of the New Covenant, God's moral requirements have been made even clearer for us today. For instance, Christ came and corrected the misinterpretation of the law that was being fostered by the Pharisees. Moreover, Christ's own life became an illustration of what the law would have us do, and thus his own life is a new example of what love requires. Indeed, the very radical character of love is so dramatically displayed in the atonement that the old commandment of loving one another can now be considered a new command. Christ explains explanation of love in his own life Surpasses that of the Old Covenant when he says that his people are to love one another even as I have loved you. So the New Covenant surpasses the Old Law in clarity. The New Covenant surpasses the Old in its efficacy as well, especially in its efficiency. Let me put it that way. Through the Old Testament, God's moral demand was being progressively revealed and explained every time new revelation is given. That new Revelation is a further elaboration and explication of God's original requirements. And so, as long as new revelation is possible, the Old Covenant can become more and more efficient in explaining God's requirement and his moral standards. But today, under the New Covenant, revelation has ended, revelation has ceased, and therefore, under the New Covenant, everything needed for complete equipping and righteous living has been given. And our understanding of morality is accordingly much better than the understanding in the Old Covenant. The New Covenant therefore surpasses the Old in its efficiency. We no longer have to wait further revelation to understand better. And finally, the New Covenant brings greater responsibility for obedience. Given all of this discontinuity, all of this change which we've been talking about, the fact is that with the giving of new light and new power in the New Covenant, the responsibility of men to obey the voice of God is increased. Luke 12:48 lays down the principle that to whom much is given, much is required. Those of us who have received more revelation are under greater responsibility. And so Acts 17 teaches that God no longer overlooks any people's disobedience, but requires all people everywhere to repent because of his appointed judge and day of judgment. The revelation of the New Covenant is even more inescapable than that of the Old Covenant, and to it we must give the more earnest heed. Therefore Hebrews 12:25. See that ye refuse not him that speaketh for if they escape, not when they refused him that warned them on earth, much more shall not we escape who turn away from him that warns from heaven. Hebrews 2:1:4. Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things that were heard, lest, aptly we drift away from them. And so the New Covenant brings even greater responsibility for obedience to God. Quite clearly, we can recognize that there are discontinuities between the Old Covenant and the New. These discontinuities are seen in theonomic light because they are taught by God's word and are not imported from our imagination, our theological constructs, aesthetic analogies, or what have you. The Bible must be the only authority when it comes to discontinuity, even as it is with respect to continuity. We've seen the Old Covenant Law and the New Covenant promise and the accomplishment of redemption have discontinuities between them. The New surpasses the old in glory, surpasses it in power, surpasses it in the realization of the shadows, and surpasses it in finality.