Old Covenant defined - vs - NEW Covenant

[listed]

Nowhere does Yahshua say that the law was abolished with this new addition. Yahweh has given us progressive revelation from the beginning.

(CLV) 1Jn 2:7
Beloved, I am not writing a new precept to you, but an old precept, which you had from the beginning. The old precept is the word which you hear.

Wrong argument here.

 

[Doug Melven]

No, Jesus gave us His own Spirit to dwell in us. He is love.

The Holy Spirit is the reason why we can love as He did. Without the indwelling Holy Spirit, we don't even belong to Christ. And it is also important to realize that without our repentance from sin, we won't be given the gift of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2:38; Romans 8:9

I said He loved us, and you detailed how He loved us.
O what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us that we should be His children.
I believe we are in agreement, you just gave it more detail than I did.

 

[HARK!]

The key biblical passage that refutes Covenant Theology is Hebrews 8:7-10 where the author clearly referred to the New Covenant:

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.
Here God clearly said the New Covenant would be nothing like the covenant He had made with their ancestors. In other words, He was not renewing the Old Covenant but creating something totally different.

You clearly need to read the scripture that you posted again. Yahweh clearly does not say "nothing like;" and he says nothing about it being "completely different." The scripture says what it says.

What DOES it say?

He simply says that it won't be "like." He then expands on that declaration, and tells us how it is different. "Declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts."

Before the law was written in stone. The law is now put in the minds, and written on the hearts of his children.

Again, nothing about abolishing the law.

 

[YouAreAwesome]

You clearly need to read the scripture that you posted again. Yahweh clearly does not say "nothing like;" and he says nothing about it being "completely different." The scripture says what it says.

What DOES it say?

He simply says that it won't be "like." He then expands on that declaration, and tells us how it is different. "Declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts."

Before the law was written in stone. The law is now put in the minds, and written on the hearts of his children.

Again, nothing about abolishing the law.

The law you say was written on stone, is that "like" the law written on our minds and hearts?

 

[HARK!]

Instead of dividing history into dispensations, you see history as a one continuous line,

You've presented a false dichotomy. History is continual, and linear, by nature. It's inherent nature is what some divide according to their agendas and perspectives.

believing God interacted with humankind in the same manner all throughout history

I didn't say that. Remember, the word "progressive?" That doesn't mean "same."

and that each covenant is built on top of the previous covenant.

I didn't say that either. I said progressive revelation, not progressive covenants. I'm really beginning to see a strong pattern here. You would really do well to stop relying on your imagination; and just read more carefully.

Thus you believe the New Covenant is a renewal or an upgrade to the already existing covenant.

Which already existing covenant? I'm assuming that you mean the broken Mosaic Covenant? There were more.

I would assume you believe the Old Testament Law was divided into three parts (ceremonial, civil, moral)

Why would you assume I believe that it was divided that way? Does that assumption support your initial assumption? You seem to make too many assumptions. Let's just stick with the facts. If you have any questions about what I believe; just ask.

Here is some of what scripture says regarding this subject:

Gen 26:5 - KJV
5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my
commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

Deut. 5
30 "Go, tell them to return to their tents. 31 But you stay here with me so that I
may give you all the commands, decrees and laws you are to teach them to
follow in the land I am giving them to possess."

You then argue moral laws apply but ceremonial and civil laws do not apply.

No I don't.

Is this correct?

No, again assumptions on your part.

I may have jumped the gun a little when you used the term "progressive revelation" and "new addition".

A little?

Because the Bible does not actually indicate a division of the Law into three parts (it doesn't even show up in church history until the 13th century!),

How many parts do you ASSUME existed before Abraham?


Gen 26:5 - KJV
5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my (1?) charge, my
(2)commandments, my (3)statutes, and my(4) laws.

Deut. 5
30 "Go, tell them to return to their tents. 31 But you stay here with me so that I
may give you all the commands, (5)decrees and laws you are to teach them to
follow in the land I am giving them to possess."

this can lead to some unconventional interpretations.

Like in the same way that one comes up with wild interpretations, by adding words to YHWH's word, then rolling with assumptions? Scripture says don't add.

The question is always "What do we keep? And what do we remove?"

Keep all. Scripture says don't subtract.

Because the Bible does not actually contain any dividing lines within the Law,

Gen 26:5 - KJV
5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my (1?) charge, my
(2)commandments, my (3)statutes, and my(4) laws.

Deut. 5
30 "Go, tell them to return to their tents. 31 But you stay here with me so that I
may give you all the commands, (5)decrees and laws you are to teach them to
follow in the land I am giving them to possess."

these lines need to be determined

YHWH did that already.

where they should be drawn is debatable

Debate it with YHWH.

Can we get tatoos? Can we eat bacon?

You can do what ever you want. YHWH gave us free will. I choose to be obedient to YHWH.

 

[HARK!]

The law you say was written on stone, is that "like" the law written on our minds and hearts?

In my experience, what was written in stone is amplified in my heart.

Let me explain. Yahshua summarized the law with only two laws that YHWH gave us. I believe that the Decalogue summarizes the 613. I believe that the 613. I believe that the 613 summarize what YHWH speaks to your heart. NO? How did Abraham know the Law? Do you think that YHWH gives us frivolous laws that change on his whim; or maybe his laws are inherent to his nature. I don't believe that YHWH's laws change anymore than I believe that YHWH's nature changes. You asked a question earlier about bacon. Can you really picture yourself smacking the grease on your lips; as you snack on bacon; as you face judgement, on the floor, before YHWH's throne?

(CLV) Isa 66:17
Those who sanctify themselves And who cleansed themselves for the gardens, going after one in their midst, Eating the flesh of swine and the abominable thing and the rodent, They shall be swept up together, averring is Yahweh;

 

[YouAreAwesome]

You've presented a false dichotomy. History is continual, and linear, by nature. It's inherent nature is what some divide according to their agendas and perspectives.



I didn't say that. Remember, the word "progressive?" That doesn't mean "same."



I didn't say that either. I said progressive revelation, not progressive covenants. I'm really beginning to see a strong pattern here. You would really do well to stop relying on your imagination; and just read more carefully.



Which already existing covenant? I'm assuming that you mean the broken Mosaic Covenant? There were more.



Why would you assume I believe that it was divided that way? Does that assumption support your initial assumption? You seem to make too many assumptions. Let's just stick with the facts. If you have any questions about what I believe; just ask.

Here is some of what scripture says regarding this subject:

Gen 26:5 - KJV
5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my
commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

Deut. 5
30 "Go, tell them to return to their tents. 31 But you stay here with me so that I
may give you all the commands, decrees and laws you are to teach them to
follow in the land I am giving them to possess."






No I don't.



No, again assumptions on your part.



A little?



How many parts do you ASSUME existed before Abraham?


Gen 26:5 - KJV
5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my (1?) charge, my
(2)commandments, my (3)statutes, and my(4) laws.

Deut. 5
30 "Go, tell them to return to their tents. 31 But you stay here with me so that I
may give you all the commands, (5)decrees and laws you are to teach them to
follow in the land I am giving them to possess."



Like in the same way that one comes up with wild interpretations, by adding words to YHWH's word, then rolling with assumptions? Scripture says don't add.



Keep all. Scripture says don't subtract.






Gen 26:5 - KJV
5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my (1?) charge, my
(2)commandments, my (3)statutes, and my(4) laws.

Deut. 5
30 "Go, tell them to return to their tents. 31 But you stay here with me so that I
may give you all the commands, (5)decrees and laws you are to teach them to
follow in the land I am giving them to possess."



YHWH did that already.



Debate it with YHWH.



You can do what ever you want. YHWH gave us free will. I choose to be obedient to YHWH.

Yes, those words you used triggered an assumption, sorry about that, I hope there's no hard feelings. Much better to get assumptions out of the way before debating though...

You called the Mosaic Covenant "broken". I agree. But why do you explain it that way? Also, if you don't believe each covenant is being built on top the previous covenant, in what way is each covenant different? When you say "keep all" with regard to the laws, do you mean to say that every single law of the Old Mosaic "broken" Covenant should be kept today?

In my experience, what was written in stone is amplified in my heart.

If what is in our hearts is an amplified version of the laws written in stone, would you describe this as "like" or "not like" the previous covenant?

You asked a question earlier about bacon. Can you really picture yourself smacking the grease on your lips; as you snack on bacon; as you face judgement, on the floor, before YHWH's throne?

Hahaha, funny way to explain the point. But I can simply turn it around. Can you really picture yourself drinking an Orange Mocha Frappuccino as you face judgement, on the floor, before YHWH's throne? How about biting into a fresh apple. I think it's the act of eating itself that appears disrespectful rather than the food. Haha, nice.

 

[HARK!]

Yes, those words you used triggered an assumption, sorry about that, I hope there's no hard feelings.

No hard feelings.

Much better to get assumptions out of the way before debating though...

Why bring assumption into the conversation at all? Why not just build a logical argument on the facts?

You called the Mosaic Covenant "broken". I agree. But why do you explain it that way?

YHWH explained it that way.

Also, if you don't believe each covenant is being built on top the previous covenant, in what way is each covenant different?

I've read convincing arguments that there are seven covenants. As of yet, I haven't studied that postulate to a solid conclusion; but I'm sure that there are more than two. Even if I had studied the facets of that subject, to the point where I felt comfortable presenting a dissertation on that topic; it would not be within the purview of this thread.

When you say "keep all" with regard to the laws, do you mean to say that every single law of the Old Mosaic "broken" Covenant should be kept today?

Every one that applies to me, to the best of my ability.

If what is in our hearts is an amplified version of the laws written in stone, would you describe this as "like" or "not like" the previous covenant?

Both similar; but not exactly the same.

Hahaha, funny way to explain the point. But I can simply turn it around. Can you really picture yourself drinking an Orange Mocha Frappuccino as you face judgement, on the floor, before YHWH's throne? How about biting into a fresh apple. I think it's the act of eating itself that appears disrespectful rather than the food. Haha, nice.

I had fun with that one too! LOL! Glad you liked it.

OK, OK, So if Yahshua's wedding feast is a covered dish event; would you even consider showing up with a sacrificial pig?

BTW, you didn't answer my question:

How many parts [of the law] do you ASSUME existed before Abraham?

 

[klutedavid]

You clearly need to read the scripture that you posted again. Yahweh clearly does not say "nothing like;" and he says nothing about it being "completely different." The scripture says what it says.

What DOES it say?

He simply says that it won't be "like." He then expands on that declaration, and tells us how it is different. "Declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts."

Before the law was written in stone. The law is now put in the minds, and written on the hearts of his children.

Again, nothing about abolishing the law.

Hello Hark.

You said.

nothing about abolishing the law

You tore up nearly the entire law yourself.

You abolished sacrificial law, offering laws, civil laws, health laws, food laws.
You abolished temple law, priesthood law, all manner of moral law, e.t.c.

Nothing about abolishing the law, you must be kidding.

 

[YouAreAwesome]

YHWH explained it that way.

In what way is the Mosaic Covenant broken?

Every one that applies to me, to the best of my ability.

How do you decide which do, and do not apply to you?

OK, OK, So if Yahshua's wedding feast is a covered dish event; would you even consider showing up with a sacrificial pig?

You are wording this riddle in a tricky way! A sacrificial pig hey? I won't be bringing a sacrificial anything to the feast! He is the sacrifice once for all! But as for bringing some food to a wedding feast, would you consider bringing a wedding cake evil? The sugar in the cake is much worse for a person than some pork! But if we don't have to consider health, because we are in our glorified bodies, then we can eat anything! Although, will there be any meat in heavens wedding feast? Most people think of the lions befriending the lambs, no more death etc. Who knows! "What goes into someone's mouth does not defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them." Says Jesus.

BTW, you didn't answer my question: How many parts [of the law] do you ASSUME existed before Abraham?

What law are you meaning? What part of the Mosaic Law? None.

 

[BobRyan]

Finding fault is a major purpose of the law. Romans 11:32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

Indeed this is the role of the law for the lost - Romans 3:19-20 but for the saved it is "written on the heart and mind" under the NEW Covenant. Same Law - different context therefore it is "still a sin" to take God's name in vain - even for Christians for even in the NT it is still true that 'sin IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4

 

[BobRyan]

What you present is generally labelled "Covenant Theology". Instead of dividing history into dispensations, you see history as a one continuous line, believing God interacted with humankind in the same manner all throughout history and that each covenant is built on top of the previous covenant. Thus you believe the New Covenant is a renewal or an upgrade to the already existing covenant. I would assume you believe the Old Testament Law was divided into three parts (ceremonial, civil, moral). You then argue moral laws apply but ceremonial and civil laws do not apply. Is this correct?

It is correct that theologians in all major Christian denominations admit to the Bible detail that the Ten Commandments are included in the moral law of God and not part of the ceremonial or civil law.

so then ... =============================

The Baptist Confession of Faith,
the Westminster Confession of Faith ,
D.L. Moody,
R.C Sproul,
Matthew Henry,
Thomas Watson
Eastern Orthodox Catechism
The Catholic Catechism.

And of course 7th day groups

Seventh-day Baptists
Seventh-day Adventists
(and 100's of others)

===============================

When both sides of the Sabbath vs Sunday discussion admit to the same Eph 6:2 and 1Cor 7:19 detail about the TEN Commandments and the NEW Covenant... well it just does not "get" any easier than that.

 

[BobRyan]

Hello Hark.
...
You abolished sacrificial law, offering laws, civil laws, health laws, food laws.
You abolished temple law, priesthood law, all manner of moral law, e.t.c.

Nothing about abolishing the law, you must be kidding.

Did that happen in "real life" with a quote of someone other than "you" to claim it??

If so , would it be too much trouble to ask you to post it???

 

[BobRyan]

And what do we remove?" Because the Bible does not actually contain any dividing lines within the Law, these lines need to be determined, and where they should be drawn is debatable.

Yes it does and we see a great example in 1 Cor 7:19 where circumcision "does not matter" but "keeping the Commandments of God" does. All major Christian denominations admit to this Bible detail as already shown.

Can we get tatoos? Can we eat bacon?

I assume you mean "can we damage our bodies and can we eat rats with God no longer caring about such things?"..

Answer: "no" according to scripture.

The key biblical passage that refutes the "two gospel" doctrine of men is Gal 1:6-9 and Gal 3:8 "the Gospel was preached to Abraham" so then one Gospel in both OT and NT and the New Covenant is it.

 

[BobRyan]

There is only one place where you will find "old"and "covenant" in the same verse. And not as "old covenant"
Hebrews 8:13

Heb 8 says "New Covenant" -

A New Covenant
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second. 8 For finding fault with them, He says,

“Behold, days are coming, says the Lord,
When I will effect a new covenant
With the house of Israel and with the house of Judah;
9 Not like the covenant which I made with their fathers
On the day when I took them by the hand
To lead them out of the land of Egypt;
For they did not continue in My covenant,
And I did not care for them, says the Lord.
10 “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
After those days, says the Lord:
I will put My laws into their minds,
And I will write them on their hearts.
And I will be their God,
And they shall be My people.
11 “And they shall not teach everyone his fellow citizen,
And everyone his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
For all will know Me,
From the least to the greatest of them.
12 “For I will be merciful to their iniquities,
And I will remember their sins no more.”

13 When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.

2 Cor 3
14 But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ.

There is no place in the NT where you find "do not take God's name in vain" -- and in the Word of God - such games mean nothing.

 

[BobRyan]

Another important point.

Jesus summarised the Old Covenant with two commandments:

"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind." This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets (Matthew 22:37–40).
​

This summary is not to be applied to the New Covenant.

False.

1. The New Covenant is in the Old Testament. Jer 31:31-33 and everyone Christ spoke to in Matt 22 knew it.

2. Jesus said "ALL the LAW and the prophets" in Matt 22 - which includes Jeremiah ... and everyone in Matt 22 knew it.

3. "The LAW and the Prophets" is a reference to "known scripture" in Matt 22 -- and everyone in Matt 22 knew it.

4. "Love God with all your heart and soul" Deut 6:5 is SCRIPTURE known to everyone in Matt 22 and we all know it.

5. "Love your neighbor as yourself" Lev 19:18 is SCRIPTURE known to everyone in Matt 22 and we all know it.

Christ was appealing to two of the Mosaic Laws - and telling the Bible scholars that were questioning him that on these two depended all of scripture - and they all knew it.

 

[Doug Melven]

There is no place in the NT where you find "do not take God's name in vain" -- and in the Word of God - such games mean nothing.

It is still part of the first covenant that was made obsolete.

False.

1. The New Covenant is in the Old Testament. Jer 31:31-33 and everyone Christ spoke to in Matt 22 knew it.

2. Jesus said "ALL the LAW and the prophets" in Matt 22 - which includes Jeremiah ... and everyone in Matt 22 knew it.

3. "The LAW and the Prophets" is a reference to "known scripture" in Matt 22 -- and everyone in Matt 22 knew it.

4. "Love God with all your heart and soul" Deut 6:5 is SCRIPTURE known to everyone in Matt 22 and we all know it.

5. "Love your neighbor as yourself" Lev 19:18 is SCRIPTURE known to everyone in Matt 22 and we all know it.

Christ was appealing to two of the Mosaic Laws - and telling the Bible scholars that were questioning him that on these two depended all of scripture - and they all knew it.

Your statement of "False" is actually disproven by all the things you cite that everybody knew. You cannot find a law anywhere in Scripture that will not be fulfilled if you manage to keep those two laws in Matthew 22.

 

[ToBeLoved]

This should be good.



Certainly it included the TEN - as a basic reading of the book of Exodus will show.



But not the "Old Covenant" . Details matter.


Ex. 34:23-27
23 “Three times in the year all your men shall appear before the Lord, the Lord God of Israel. 24 For I will cast out the nations before you and enlarge your borders; neither will any man covet your land when you go up to appear before the Lord your God three times in the year.
25 “You shall not offer the blood of My sacrifice with leaven, nor shall the sacrifice of the Feast of the Passover be left until morning.
26 “The first of the firstfruits of your land you shall bring to the house of the Lord your God. You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk.”
27 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Write these words, for according to the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.”



The Old Covenant is a term unique to the NEW Testament and is never used in the Old Testament text. But it was an “agreement” made with the nation of Israel – not with an individual.


The Old Covenant a type of the arrangement between God and lost humanity where the LAW of God condemns all mankind as sinners – see Romans 3:19-21


Rom 3
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin.


From; What was the Old Covenant?

“In the Old Covenant, the Israelites were required to obey God and keep the Law, and in return He protected and blessed them”


(Deuteronomy 30:15–18;

15 “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil, 16 in that I command you today to love the Lord your God, to walk in His ways, and to keep His commandments, His statutes, and His judgments, that you may live and multiply; and the Lord your God will bless you in the land which you go to possess. 17 But if your heart turns away so that you do not hear, and are drawn away, and worship other gods and serve them, 18 I announce to you today that you shall surely perish; you shall not prolong your days in the land which you cross over the Jordan to go in and possess.



1 Samuel 12:14–15).
14 If you fear the Lord and serve Him and obey His voice, and do not rebel against the commandment of the Lord, then both you and the king who reigns over you will continue following the Lord your God. 15 However, if you do not obey the voice of the Lord, but rebel against the commandment of the Lord, then the hand of the Lord will be against you, as it was against your fathers.


The national covenant was broken by Israel -


“The Old Covenant established our guilt before God and our need for a Savior. The Old Covenant was never intended to save us;”


The National Covenant was written by Moses at God’s Command and is made with Israel as a nation

The Covenant was written by the hand of God 40 days later – The Ten Commandments are moral law for all mankind. But as long as they are only external on tablets of stone and not on the tablets of the human heart – they condemn all mankind as sinners. Rom 3:19-20


Ex. 34:

23 “Three times in the year all your men shall appear before the Lord, the Lord God of Israel. 24 For I will cast out the nations before you and enlarge your borders; neither will any man covet your land when you go up to appear before the Lord your God three times in the year.
25 “You shall not offer the blood of My sacrifice with leaven, nor shall the sacrifice of the Feast of the Passover be left until morning.
26 “The first of the firstfruits of your land you shall bring to the house of the Lord your God. You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk.”
27 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Write these words, for according to the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.”


Forty days later – we have God writing the Ten Commandments


28 So he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water. And He (God) wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments.

A FEW examples of Commands in both the Old Covenant and the New Covenant – the moral law of God

Deut 6:5 "Love God with all your heart"
Lev 19:18 "Love your neighbor as yourself"
Ex 20:7 "Do not take God's name in vain"
Ex 20:12 "Honor your parents"




=======================================================


No text says "The Ten Commandments were called Ishmael" not even Gal 4 says it.

No text says "The Ten Commandments was of the bondservant"
No text says "The Ten Commandments are not the law of God in the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-33,"



1. No text says "not the LAW that I gave at Sinai"
2. No text says that Jeremiah did not know the TEN Commandments were in the LAW of God
3. No scholars claim that the LAW of God known to Jeremiah did not include God's Ten Commandments

Why would God call the 'Old' Covenant 'old' in Exodus when He was introducing a non-existing concept up to that point?

Thinking cap = ON

 

[ToBeLoved]

Nowhere does Yahshua say that the law was abolished with this new addition. Yahweh has given us progressive revelation from the beginning.

No, it distinctly says that the old covenant is obsolete and will dissapear.

Hebrews 8:6-13
6 Now, however, Jesus has received a far superior ministry, just as the covenant He mediates is superior and is founded on better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been without fault, no place would have been sought for a second. 8But when God found fault with the people, He said:

“Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord,

when I will make a new covenant

with the house of Israel

and with the house of Judah.

9It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers

when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt,

because they did not abide by My covenant,

and I disregarded them, says the Lord.

10This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel

after those days, says the Lord.

I will put My laws in their minds,

and inscribe them on their hearts.

And I will be their God,

and they will be My people.

11No longer will each one teach his neighbor or his brother,

saying, ‘Know the Lord,’

because they will all know Me,

from the least of them to the greatest.

12For I will forgive their iniquities,

and remember their sins no more.”b

13 In speaking of a new covenant, He has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.


That doesn't say progressive revelation.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Heb 8 says "New Covenant" -

A New Covenant
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second. 8 For finding fault with them, He says,

“Behold, days are coming, says the Lord,
When I will effect a new covenant
With the house of Israel and with the house of Judah;
9 Not like the covenant which I made with their fathers
On the day when I took them by the hand
To lead them out of the land of Egypt;
For they did not continue in My covenant,
And I did not care for them, says the Lord.
10 “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
After those days, says the Lord:
I will put My laws into their minds,
And I will write them on their hearts.
And I will be their God,
And they shall be My people.
11 “And they shall not teach everyone his fellow citizen,
And everyone his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
For all will know Me,
From the least to the greatest of them.
12 “For I will be merciful to their iniquities,
And I will remember their sins no more.”

13 When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.

2 Cor 3
14 But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ.

There is no place in the NT where you find "do not take God's name in vain" -- and in the Word of God - such games mean nothing.

You quote the right scriptures and make us think you understand what the new covenant is. Interesting...