Letters for this section should be addressed to "Letters to the Editor." The editor reserves the right to use letters so addressed in whole or in part, and to include your name and edit the letter for clarity or space. We welcome your comments.
Several of our writers have covered the topic of the transformation from the old to new covenants, including how Paul and others in the first century dealt with the issue.
To quote from the June Bible Study, "Paul and the New Covenant": "Most of the Ten Commandments are quoted with approval in the New Testament. Those commands reflect aspects of God's law that were in effect long before Sinai--from the beginning. One is not--the Sabbath command. It was a ceremonial law, instituted for a temporary period."
I think our old way of thinking would have reasoned: "Well, if six or seven of the Ten Commandments are requoted under the new covenant, then that indicates that all 10 of them continue to be binding."
However, comparing the two covenants to two legal wills, we can see the fault in our previous reasoning.
Say I had produced a will designating the disbursement of my personal property but later decided to modify some issues. I wanted some of the terms to remain the same, but I wanted to change some major issues.
Because the changes radically altered the terms of the will, I produced a new version rather than tack on addendums.
When the new will was finalized, it contained some points included in the original will, but many of the original terms were left out, and important new terms were added.
I die and the property is disbursed according to the latest will.
However, some heirs kept copies of the older, outdated will and they dispute the disbursements because some terms in the old will have not been addressed.
The lawyer explains that the new will totally replaces the old one, and the new terms supersede the old ones. That is why the new will was drawn up. But the heirs say: "The new will contains some of the same terms as the old will. That proves that all terms of the old will should be carried over into the new."
The flaws in this reasoning become obvious, and I can more clearly see how the new covenant totally replaces the old.
Lee Berger
White Oak, Texas
The June issue of The Worldwide News incorrectly said that a copy of the video, Millennial Madness, was sent to each church area.
The statement should have read that a copy of the video was sent by Church Administration to each church pastor participating in the church's in-service training program. PTM regrets that budgetary constraints prevent us from offering this video to all church libraries free of charge.
Copyright © Worldwide Church of God, 1999