Is the old covenant obsolete or becoming obsolete?

tonychanyt said:

New King James Version, Hebrews 8:


The main verb of the sentence is:
πεπαλαίωκεν (pepalaiōken)
Verb - Perfect Indicative Active - 3rd Person Singular
Strong's Greek: 3822. παλαιόω (palaioó) — 4 Occurrences

BDAG:
① act. (La 3:4; Is 65:22; Da 7:25 Theod.) make old, declare/treat as obsolete
② pass. become old (oft. w. the connotation of becoming useless


The secondary verb/participle is the same lexeme G3822:
παλαιούμενον (palaioumenon)
Verb - Present Participle Middle or Passive - Nominative Neuter Singular

NKJV translated the passive voice using "becoming".

Now, Berean Standard Bible:


BSB emphasized the secondary verb form aspect, the participle, and translated it using "is".

Both translations are valid depending on the emphasis.

The next verb is:
aging
γηράσκον (gēraskon)
Verb - Present Participle Active - Nominative Neuter Singular
Strong's 1095: To become old, grow old. From geras; to be senescent.
Strong's Greek: 1095. γηράσκω (géraskó) — 2 Occurrences

BDAG:


The original phrase "παλαιούμενον καὶ γηράσκον" suggests a process. They pair better by translating the phrase as "becoming obsolete and growing old".

Is the old covenant obsolete?

At the time of the Book of Hebrews, God had declared the old covenant obsolete. Meanwhile, what had been declared obsolete was aging and growing old and would soon disappear. There would be an elapsed time between declaration and disappearance.

See also

• Did Jesus ABOLISH the Mosaic Law?
• How long will the Torah last?

Click to expand...

It was becoming obsolete at that time and at that time would soon disappear. God had established His covenant with Israel, and the Jews of the time were still part of it. That generation would have to pass away for the old covenant to also pass away. Forty years later the old covenant ended with the destruction of the temple. Since that time there has been no way for anyone to fulfill the terms of the old covenant for lack of a place to offer sacrifices.

tonychanyt said:

New King James Version, Hebrews 8:


The main verb of the sentence is:
πεπαλαίωκεν (pepalaiōken)
Verb - Perfect Indicative Active - 3rd Person Singular
Strong's Greek: 3822. παλαιόω (palaioó) — 4 Occurrences

BDAG:
① act. (La 3:4; Is 65:22; Da 7:25 Theod.) make old, declare/treat as obsolete
② pass. become old (oft. w. the connotation of becoming useless


The secondary verb/participle is the same lexeme G3822:
παλαιούμενον (palaioumenon)
Verb - Present Participle Middle or Passive - Nominative Neuter Singular

NKJV translated the passive voice using "becoming".

Now, Berean Standard Bible:


BSB emphasized the secondary verb form aspect, the participle, and translated it using "is".

Both translations are valid depending on the emphasis.

The next verb is:
aging
γηράσκον (gēraskon)
Verb - Present Participle Active - Nominative Neuter Singular
Strong's 1095: To become old, grow old. From geras; to be senescent.
Strong's Greek: 1095. γηράσκω (géraskó) — 2 Occurrences

BDAG:


The original phrase "παλαιούμενον καὶ γηράσκον" suggests a process. They pair better by translating the phrase as "becoming obsolete and growing old".

Is the old covenant obsolete?

At the time of the Book of Hebrews, God had declared the old covenant obsolete. Meanwhile, what had been declared obsolete was aging and growing old and would soon disappear. There would be an elapsed time between declaration and disappearance.

See also

• Did Jesus ABOLISH the Mosaic Law?
• How long will the Torah last?

Click to expand...

The portion where Jesus says (Not one Jot or tittle will pass from it until Heaven and Earth pass away) seems to bind to James 2. Believers that evoke the Law against humanity are instantly condemned by the full measure of the Law. Paul and James call this the sin of Favoritism. Paul writes about it in Galatians 2 and James writes about it in James 2.

Not only did Jesus warn us to not judge, but He made a very hard statement.

John 5:39 You pore over the Scriptures because you think you have eternal life in them, yet they testify about Me. 40 And you are not willing to come to Me so that you may have life.

41 “I do not accept glory from men, 42 but I know you—that you have no love for God within you. 43 I have come in My Father’s name, yet you don’t accept Me. If someone else comes in his own name, you will accept him. 44 How can you believe? While accepting glory from one another, you don’t seek the glory that comes from the only God. 45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. Your accuser is Moses, on whom you have set your hope. 46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, because he wrote about Me. 47 But if you don’t believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”

HTacianas said:

It was becoming obsolete at that time and at that time would soon disappear. God had established His covenant with Israel, and the Jews of the time were still part of it. That generation would have to pass away for the old covenant to also pass away. Forty years later the old covenant ended with the destruction of the temple. Since that time there has been no way for anyone to fulfill the terms of the old covenant for lack of a place to offer sacrifices.

Click to expand...

I completely disagree. I believe that saying the old covenant was not yet made obsolete until 70 AD, as you believe, is like saying that the new covenant was not established until then, which is obviously ludicrous because the new covenant was put into effect by the blood of Christ.

Hebrews 8:6 But in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises. 7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8 But God found fault with the people and said: “The days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. 9 It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord. 10 This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. 11 No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. 12 For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.” 13 By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear. (NIV)

I'm not sure what translation you're looking at, but it looks like maybe the NASB?

Hebrews 8:13 (NASB): When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is about to disappear.

I like the NIV translation of Hebrews 8:13 better than the NASB, or whichever one you're using for that verse, because the NASB (and any other others which translate it that way) is causing the verse to contradict itself. If God made the first covenant obsolete, then it's obsolete and not becoming obsolete. It's either obsolete or it's not. All translations that I've seen start out by saying He made the first covenant old or obsolete. At that point, it's useless and no longer in effect. That's what obsolete means. You can't then say it's becoming obsolete when it's already obsolete. It's unfortunate that the verse was translated so poorly in some translations.

So, what does it mean when it says it was about to vanish or disappear as of the time the book of Hebrews was written? Does that mean it hadn't become obsolete yet at that point? No. It already said explicitly that "He has made the first obsolete". That's a done deal. So, in order to not contradict what was already said in the verse, it must mean that for it to vanish away and disappear just means that traces of the old obsolete covenant were soon to disappear. And that's exactly what happened when the temple buildings were destroyed in 70 AD. It left no traces of the old covenant and it disappeared. But, that doesn't mean it wasn't already obsolete well before that when Jesus established the new covenant with His blood.

I hope I don't have to convince anyone that the new covenant was established by the blood of Christ. I'll assume not for now. So, is there any other scripture we can point to which would indicate that the old covenant with its many commandments and requirements for animal sacrifices and offerings and such was made obsolete at the same time that the new covenant was established and put into effect? Yes, I believe so. Here's one such scripture:

Colossians 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14 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;

Notice here that Jesus put an end to "the handwriting of ordinances that was against us". That is a reference to the old covenant law of Moses and its many commandments and ordinances that no one could follow perfectly (except Jesus, of course) and if you broke even one of the commandments, you were guilty of breaking all of them (James 2:10). Jesus put an end to that burden by "nailing it to his cross". The first covenant was made obsolete at the cross. So, the idea of it still becoming obsolete even after it was made obsolete is contradictory. I believe scripture is clear that the new covenant was established and the old covenant was made obsolete and abolished at the cross by the blood of Christ.

tonychanyt said:

How would you translate He 8:13?

Click to expand...

As I indicated in my post #4, I like the way the NIV translated it, so I would say I would translate it like that.

Hebrews 8:13 (NIV): By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

This doesn't contradict itself like some other translations of this verse which say He made the first covenant obsolete and then following that up by saying "and what is becoming obsolete...". If it was obsolete, then it was obsolete and not becoming obsolete. The reason it says it would "soon disappear" is that the traces of the obsolete old covenant were still visible in the form of the second temple that was still standing at the time that was written. That would disappear in the near future from that time in 70 AD when it was destroyed, just as Jesus said it would be (Matthew 24:1-2, Mark 13:1-2, Luke 21:6-7).