Let me begin by saying that those brothers with whom I disagree, whether they deny outright any involvement of the Church with the New covenant, or whether they believe the Church participates in the New covenant are due a respectful hearing. This is not the most important subject of Christian Theology.
However, the relation of the Church to the New covenant is significant. And that is why I have written these articles. Now it is time to engage with those who differ from me. As I do so I want to recommend that my readers read their arguments for themselves as I cannot but quote them briefly. AINC = An Introduction to the New covenant, edited by Christopher Cone. DUNC = Dispensational Understanding of the New Covenant edited by Mike Stallard.
The Conditions Mentioned in Jer. 31 & Ezek. 36 Have Not Happened To Israel
We see this objection in, e.g., Gary Gilley, AINC, 22-23. The burden of this argument (propounded notably by John Master in Issues In Dispensationalism) is that the manifestation of all the NC blessings promised to Israel have not occurred. Therefore, the NC is not in effect.
My response to this is that one needs to understand the phenomenon of the prophecies about Messiah being rolled up into one in the OT and in need of being parsed between the first and the second comings of Jesus. If we don’t do this with NC texts in the NT, we ought not to do it with messianic texts in the NT because Christ is not reigning upon earth yet, and by this logic we would have to say that since He isn’t reigning all those OT fulfillment texts quoted by the NT authors to authenticate Christ’s first coming are suspect if they predict His reign (e.g., Psa. 2; Isa. 42; 61). The fact is, in 2 Cor. 3:3 Paul alludes to Jeremiah 31:33 and applies it to Christians in Corinth. The fact that other parts of Jer. 33:31-34 are not yet fulfilled does not mean Jer. 31:33 has no bearing on the Church. Paul clearly states that it does. And he clearly states the same for Isa. 42:6 in Acts 13:47.
The New Covenant Does Not Play A Major Role In The NT
The argument here is based upon the amount of mentions the NC gets. But that criterion is not a good one. A better metric would be to analyze where the mentions occur and what is made of them, together with seeing how the NT authors employ NC texts from the OT. This is what I did here, here, and here. And that is not including the book of Hebrews. What we see is that the NC is very important to the NT writers. Paul’s discussion in 2 Cor. 3 – 5 is based upon it!
A key text here for determining Paul’s object in 2 Cor. 3:6 is the next two verses with verse 18:
But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious?… But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord. – 2 Corinthians 3:7-8, 18.
Now 2 Cor. 3:6 refers to “the letter” that “kills.” This corresponds to “the ministry of death” in verse 7 and the “ministry of condemnation” in verse 9. Verses 7 and 8 then speak of “glory.” Verse 7 of the passing glory of Moses and the old covenant; verse 8 of the “more glorious” ministry of the Spirit, which, in context, refers back to ministry of the New covenant in verse 6 (and the life-giving ministry of the Spirit in verse 3). So the question is, what does the apostle mean by his question in verses 7 and 8? Is he asking (A) “How will the New covenant ministry of the Spirit be when it finally arrives in the future?” Or is he asking (B) “How will the present New covenant ministry of the Spirit outdo the glory of the old covenant ministry of death? Proponents of the “Church has no relation to the New covenant” position must answer with (A). But look at verse 18:
But we all, with unveiled face, beholding [presently] as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord. (My italics).
The verb translated “are being changed” is metamorphoumetha, which is a present passive indicative basically meaning “being changed continuously in the ongoing present.” The main point being that “the Spirit of the Lord” is presently transforming the saints “from glory to glory” (probably meaning from new birth to final glorification) through “the ministry of the Spirit” (2 Cor. 3:8), which is the “ministry of righteousness” (2 Cor. 3:9).
And let us add the very next verse:
Therefore, since we [presently] have this ministry… – 2 Corinthians 4:1a (My italics).
There is no way out of it. A close reading of 2 Cor. 3:3 – 4:1 shows that Paul is throughout speaking of ministering the New covenant (aka, the “ministry of the Spirit” (2 Cor. 3:8), the “ministry of righteousness” (2 Cor. 3:9), and the “ministry of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:18), to the Corinthians. Hence, this passage alone proves that the New covenant is extremely important to the ministry and thought of the apostles.
1 Corinthians 11:25 Does Not Indicate That The New Covenant Is In Effect
This assertion is made frequently (e.g., C. Cone, AINC, 93-94). In answer to this we need not confine our study to 1 Cor. 11. We may simply ask if the NT indicates that the New covenant is in effect today. Those who oppose this view have to believe that Christ’s sacrificial blood was not NC blood when it was spilled, but only becomes NC blood after Christ’s return. We begin with Acts 20:28:
Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
So, here we are given the straightforward truth that the Church is purchased by the blood of Jesus Christ. ! Peter 1:2 declares Christians are,
elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ
Then, Hebrews 12:24 identifies,
Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.
I am assuming here that we can all agree that Hebrews 12 has direct application to the Church even if “Hebrews” are the designated recipients. This means the blood the Church is sprinkled with is New covenant blood, which effectually cleanses us.
Putting all this together, we get this:
We are saved by Christ’s blood
Christ’s blood is the blood of the New covenant
Whoever is sprinkled by Christ’s blood is party to the New covenant
None of Christ’s blood is non-New covenant blood
Ergo, we are saved by New covenant blood.
Conclusion: we are party to the New covenant.
The two elements we take at the Lord’s supper signify Christ’s body and blood. The blood is “the new covenant in My blood” represented by the “cup” (cf. 1 Cor. 10:16) Hence, we are (or should be) proclaiming our membership in the New covenant every time we take the elements.
There is no statement in the NT that says, “we are in the New covenant now.” That’s true. But we cannot ignore the teaching of the NT that the blood which cleanses us is all New covenant blood. Furthermore, as I pointed out in Part 11, Christ’s priestly ministry is connected to the New covenant!
