Objection:
You quote a lot from the Old Testament to prove your doctrines, particularly about the law and the Sabbath. However, most Christians find their guidance and principles in the New Testament.
Answer:
We do quote much from the Old Testament. We also quote much from the New. Actually, we make no distinction in authority between the Old and the New Testament, and for the very reason that we are Christians. We believe that the whole Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, is inspired by God and thus rightly the guide for our lives.
When they discuss the law and the Sabbath, some people seek to set up a contrast or even conflict between the Old and the New Testament, as though the former were of little or no value and entirely superseded by the latter. This false contrast lies at the root of much of the erroneous reasoning that marks the arguments of those who contend that the law and the Sabbath were abolished at the cross.
The “Bible” of the apostles was what is now known as the Old Testament. The first writings of these earliest Christian ministers did not begin to come from their pens until twenty, thirty, and more years after the ascension of Christ. Nor were there printing presses and fast-mail service quickly to distribute these writings. Only slowly did they gain circulation. It is wholly reasonable to believe that during the first century of the Christian Era, the term “the Scriptures”, mentioned repeatedly in the New Testament, was primarily understood to mean what we now call the Old Testament.
Christ admonished the Jews to “search the scriptures; for in them you think you have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.” John 5:39. And then He added, “Had you believed Moses, you would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if you believe not his writings, how shall you believe my words?” Verses 46, 47.
The disciples did not understand the events of crucifixion week because they did not rightly understand the Scriptures, the Old Testament (See Luke 24:27). On His resurrection day, Christ showed them how His death and resurrection were a fulfillment of prophecy: “Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures.” Luke 24:45. Christ knew nothing of the doctrine of disregarding the Old Testament.
Nor did the apostles give any hint that they discounted the Old Testament in favor of some writings they were soon to produce. Paul wrote to Timothy: “From a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” 2 Timothy 3:15-17. Could the New Testament accomplish more than this!
Both Christ and the apostles repeatedly cited the Old Testament in confirmation of their teachings. To Satan, Christ said, “It is written,” and thrice quoted the Old Testament (See Matthew 4:4-10). He rebuked the scribes and Pharisees by quoting the fifth commandment from the book of Exodus and by repeating the words of Isaiah (See Matthew 15:1-9). Also, see Christ’s conversation with the rich young ruler and the lawyer (Matthew 19:16-19; Luke 10:25-28). Prominent in these references to the Old Testament are the quotations from the Ten Commandments.
How did Paul prove that all men, Jews, and Gentiles, were guilty before God and thus in need of the salvation offered through Christ? By quoting from the Old Testament (See Romans 3:9-18). And how did he know that he was a sinner before God and in need of the gospel? By calling to mind what was written in the Old Testament, specifically what was written in the Ten Commandments (See Romans 7:7). To the church at Rome, Paul commanded: “Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loves another hath fulfilled the law.” Romans 13:8. And did he profess to be setting forth a new code, which was the result of a new revelation then given to him? No. He quotes the Old Testament and specifically the Ten Commandments (See verses 9, 10). And how did Paul support his appeal to children to obey their parents? By quoting from the Old Testament, specifically the Ten Commandments (See Ephesians 6:1-3).
As James develops his argument against having “respect to persons,” does he set forth new laws? No, he quotes the Old Testament, focusing on citations from the Ten Commandments (See James 2:8-12).
And what proof did Peter offer in support of his declaration that we should be “holy”? “Because it is written, Be you holy; for I am holy.” 1 Peter 1:16. His proof is a quotation from Leviticus 11:44.
The Scriptures, from Genesis to Revelation, are one whole. The source of the Old and the New Testament is the same—the inspiration of the Spirit of God. Their objective is the same—to unfold God’s plan, reveal Christ, warn against sin, and present God’s holy standard of right.
Someone long ago well observed: The New Testament is concealed in the Old, the Old Testament is revealed in the New. We can best understand the promise in the last book of the Bible, of a re-created, a new, earth and a verdant tree of life, when we turn to the first book of the Bible that describes the good earth, with its original tree of life, that came forth from God’s hand when He first created this world. We best grasp the meaning of the cross, and Christ’s words, “I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me,” when we read the Genesis account of man’s fall.
We should never forget that the very titles “Old Testament” and “New Testament” are artificial. Bible writers do not thus divide the Scriptures. Both Testaments deal with old and new in the drama of sin and salvation. The Old Testament presents the promise of a new earth and a new covenant, as well as picturing man’s iniquities from earliest days. The New Testament discusses at length the “old man” of sin and the ancient problem of man’s rebellion, as well as describing the “new man” in Christ Jesus and the glories of a world to come. The interrelationship of Old Testament to New, the dependence of one on the other, has ever been understood by our adversary, the devil. That is why he long ago began his attacks on the Bible by seeking to undermine the historicity and authenticity of the Old Testament. It was at this point that higher criticism of the Bible began. And with the Old destroyed, the New soon collapses for lack of historical foundation and meaning. Understandably, Modernists should be found minimizing the spiritual authority and significance of the Old Testament. But what is inexplicable is the attitude of some who consider themselves Fundamentalists of the Fundamentalists regarding the Old Testament. Why should they seek to tear in two the seamless garment of Scripture? Why should they set forth the doctrine that a holy command of God in the Old Testament must wait for restatement in the New before it has authority in the Christian Era? The record is clear that the New Testament writers quoted from the Old, not to inform their readers that a particular passage from the Old was still binding, but to provide corroborative proof that their newly uttered New Testament declarations agreed with the Old and thus were also binding. In other words, the apostles, who reminded their readers that the “holy men of God” in “old time” “spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost,” wished those readers to see that they, the apostles, spoke by the same Holy Ghost (See 2 Peter 1:21)! Hence they repeatedly cited in support of their admonitions and doctrinal reasoning the words of those “holy men” who wrote the Old Testament.
Ceremonial rituals described in the Old Testament indeed expired, by limitation, at the cross, for then the shadow met reality, and the New Testament writers specifically state that those rites, as set forth in a series of ceremonial laws, had come to an end. But that fact in no way makes the Old Testament inferior to the New or justifies the contention that the New supplants the Old.
