When did/will the old covenant end?

[RDKirk]

The new covenant began with the preaching and teaching of John the Baptist and and then with Jesus by teaching and manifesting the things of the kingdom of God. It was fulfilled at the cross. The beginning of the end of the old covenant was also with the cross. But it’s end was with the destruction of the temple and blood sacrifice system of animals. It was still fading according to the book of Hebrews which was written about 65 AD.

Hebrews 8:13

Yes, I pointed that out earlier as, to my mind, the transition period of obsolescence alluded to by the writer of Hebrews.

 

[RaymondG]

The old covenant ends when Christ is born and fully realized in us.

 

[Hillsage]

Yes, I pointed that out earlier as, to my mind, the transition period of obsolescence alluded to by the writer of Hebrews.

Sorry, I did get here late and didn't go through the whole thread. But, maybe 'great minds' just think alike. Hopefully. Our opinion certainly doesn't change anything on judgment day.

 

[claninja]

Those are not willful sins in the first verse, as they are in the second. Where is the word repentance anywhere in that sentence. A Christian walks in the light, as in 1 John 1:7. When you walk in the Spirit you are not committing sins of the flesh. But are we perfect yet? No, and those sins not unto death are the sins that we could commit that are not willfully committed. Otherwise, Universalism would not be the false doctrine that it is.

Not really following you here. but anyways.......the OP is "when did/will the old covenant end". If you want to discuss the differences between willful sins and non-willful sins, sins of flesh, maybe start of a different thread?

 

[claninja]

The Old Law ended with Christ's death.

If the old law ended at Christ's death, how could it be fading away long after Christ's death?
2 Corinthians 3:7 Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses’ face because of its glory, which is fading away.
2 Corinthians 3:11 For if what is fading away came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.

If the old law ended at Christ's death, how could it be ready to vanish away long after Christ's death?
Hebrews 8:13 In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

If the old law ended at Christ's death, how could there be those under the old covenant persecuting those under the new covenant long after Christ's death?
Galatians 4:24-25,29 24Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. 25Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia;e she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now

If the old law ended at Christ's death, why did Paul have to die to it after Christ's death?
Romans 7: 4-6 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. 5For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. 6But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.

 

[Hazelelponi]

The existence of sin requires there to be a standard of what is and is not sin, and that standard is God's Law.

I'm only answering this quoted portion of your post because this statement is absolutely wrong and absolutely unbiblical.

So much so I am not reading the rest of what you've written.

The Standard of what is and is not sin is NOT the law It is love.
.

Matthew 22:36-40 on Love hangs all the law and the Prophets..

Romans 13:10 - love is the fulfillment because it does no harm.

There is no law under the new covenant that is not fulfilled if you love, first the Lord God with all our heart and all our soul and all our mind, then our neighbor as ourselves.

If you love your neighbor you'll not commit any sin against anyone or God, if you love God you'll not commit any sin against Him. You'll not put anything before Him, nor have any idol's, you'll be happy with your sustenance, not covet etc etc etc.

Romans 13:8-14 in short, Romans 10:4

Unlike the law, love is a burden that is light, because God fills us with His love when we believe on Jesus as Lord and Savior.

 

[claninja]

Those who refuse to, or cannot, accept Jesus as the Messiah and fulfiller of the law, or drink his blood of the NEW Covenant, are still under the law.

for the past almost 2000 years, the old covenant law has been impossible to follow, as the earthly tabernacle (temple) was destroyed in 70 ad.

The law hasn't changed

Hebrews 7:12 For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well.

but we aren't under it. We are IN Christ, who has fulfilled the law.

Amen to that!

 

[claninja]

But the thief on the cross went to heaven under the New Covenant

How did the thief go to heaven (paradise) that day, if Jesus didn't go to heaven until 40 some days later?
Luke 23:43 And he said to him, “Truly I say to you today you will be with me in paradise.”
John 20:17 Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father
Acts 1:3 He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.

As did all New Covenant converts from then on.

Believers didn't go to heaven after the cross, they fell asleep in Christ, with the resurrection being their hope.
1 Corinthians 15:6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.

Christ is the first fruits of the resurrection. Then when he returns, those who belong to him.
1 Corinthians 15:20,23 But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 23But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ

Why would believers ascend to heaven BEFORE the resurrection, if Christ ascended AFTER the resurrection?



Interesting to note, Paul states the power of sin is the Law and the sting of sin is death. When does the resurrection of believers occur? Well, according to Paul when death has no power. In other words the resurrection occurs when the Law has no power.
1 Corinthians 15:54-56 When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:
“Death is swallowed up in victory.”
55“O death, where is your victory?
O death, where is your sting?”
56The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.

 

[Dave L]

How did the thief go to heaven (paradise) that day, if Jesus didn't go to heaven until 40 some days later?
Luke 23:43 And he said to him, “Truly I say to you today you will be with me in paradise.”
John 20:17 Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father
Acts 1:3 He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.



Believers didn't go to heaven after the cross, they fell asleep in Christ, with the resurrection being their hope.
1 Corinthians 15:6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.

Christ is the first fruits of the resurrection. Then when he returns, those who belong to him.
1 Corinthians 15:20,23 But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 23But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ

Why would believers ascend to heaven BEFORE the resurrection, if Christ ascended AFTER the resurrection?



Interesting to note, Paul states the power of sin is the Law and the sting of sin is death. When does the resurrection of believers occur? Well, according to Paul when death has no power. In other words the resurrection occurs when the Law has no power.
1 Corinthians 15:54-56 When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:
“Death is swallowed up in victory.”
55“O death, where is your victory?
O death, where is your sting?”
56The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.

Jesus is God, he is everywhere.

 

[claninja]

Jesus is God, he is everywhere.

Amen to that Dave!

 

[icxn]

Christ in His Divine Nature never left Heaven. The Divine Nature is un-circumscribed. That means it cannot be contained by anything. It can't move from place to place since it is everywhere. In Heaven (or Paradise) that is what we are going to experience of Him, His Glory to use another synonymous word. So the thief was indeed in Paradise with Christ that very day.

- edit -

It looks like someone beat me to it.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Not really following you here. but anyways.......the OP is "when did/will the old covenant end". If you want to discuss the differences between willful sins and non-willful sins, sins of flesh, maybe start of a different thread?

You are the one who made a statement, and I was correcting your mistake.

You said: but if we do willfully sin, which we will in times of weakness, we have an advocated with the Father, Jesus Christ

That is wrong and a blatant error that must be addressed. It is unintentional sins that we have an advocate with the Father over.

I'm not going out of this OP to correct a mistake in this thread. Sorry if you want it buried.

Not even the Old Covenant covered willful sins - they killed them. Jesus, on the other hand, forgave all sin, including willful sins, took away the sin nature so we would not commit willful sins, and gave us His Holy Spirit to never sin willfully again. To say what you did and include the word 'willfully' shows evidence of the false teaching in the church today that is apathetic toward willful sin, going so far as to ignorantly say "sin is sin." The type of sin covered with an advocate are the same type of sins we commit while walking in the Spirit 1 John 1:7, thus are NOT willful. Whenever that ignorance shows its ugly head, I'll chime in to teach this important difference. Obviously, you haven't read all the other threads on this subject, or you would know better.

 

[claninja]

You said: but if we do willfully sin, which we will in times of weakness, we have an advocated with the Father, Jesus Christ

Why did you omit part of my quotation?

"We no longer want to willfully sin after being born again, but if we do willfully sin, which we will in times of weakness, we have an advocated with the Father, Jesus Christ, who was the propitiation for our sins."

That is wrong and a blatant error that must be addressed. It is unintentional sins that we have an advocate with the Father over.

Where does it say unintentional sin in this verse?
1 John 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.

If we repent, we are forgiven of ALL sin and ALL unrighteousness.
1 John 1:7, 9 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from ALL sin. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from ALL unrighteousness.

and I was correcting your mistake.

I'm not going out of this OP to correct a mistake in this thread. Sorry if you want it buried.

My 'mistake' is your misunderstanding of what I believe.

Not even the Old Covenant covered willful sins

Correct, the law of the old covenant did not cover or forgive high handed sins (defiant)
Numbers 15:30 But the person who does anything with a high hand, whether he is native or a sojourner, reviles the Lord, and that person shall be cut off from among his people.
But the law of the old covenant also never actually took away unintentional sins either
Hebrews 10:4 It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

Only through Christ, and not the law, are our sins forgiven.

, and gave us His Holy Spirit to never sin willfully again.

He gave us the holy spirit to help us overcome our sins and to convict us of sin.

To say what you did and include the word willfully shows evidence of the false teaching in the church today that is apathetic toward all sin.

If a church taught that it is ok to sin and it is ok to continue to sin after becoming a Christian, I would absolutely agree with you. It is definitely not ok to sin, and it is definitely not ok to continue to sin.

Romans 6:1 What then shall we say? Shall we continue in sin so that grace may increase? By no means!

But the reality is, Christians still cheat, lie, covet, hate, steal, dishonor parents, lust, have idols. You mean to tell me you have never lied, cheated, hated, or put other things before God after becoming a Christian? I know I have. and I am not proud, but beg God for forgiveness for my weaknesses and short comings and for God to give me the strength to overcome in the future. Every day I war against the desire of the flesh, constantly dying to the self.

Romans 7:18-20 I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my flesh; for I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19For I do not do the good I want to do. Instead, I keep on doing the evil I do not want to do. 20And if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

But thanks be to God!
Romans 7:24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25Thanks be to God, through Jesus Christ our Lord!

 

[1stcenturylady]

Why did you omit part of my quotation?

"We no longer want to willfully sin after being born again, but if we do willfully sin, which we will in times of weakness, we have an advocated with the Father, Jesus Christ, who was the propitiation for our sins."



Where does it say unintentional sin in this verse?
1 John 2:1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.

If we repent, we are forgiven of ALL sin and ALL unrighteousness.
1 John 1:7, 9 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from ALL sin. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from ALL unrighteousness.





My 'mistake' is your misunderstanding of what I believe.



Correct, the law of the old covenant did not cover or forgive high handed sins (defiant)
Numbers 15:30 But the person who does anything with a high hand, whether he is native or a sojourner, reviles the Lord, and that person shall be cut off from among his people.
But the law of the old covenant also never actually took away unintentional sins either
Hebrews 10:4 It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

Only through Christ, and not the law, are our sins forgiven.



He gave us the holy spirit to help us overcome our sins and to convict us of sin.



If a church taught that it is ok to sin and it is ok to continue to sin after becoming a Christian, I would absolutely agree with you. It is definitely not ok to sin, and it is definitely not ok to continue to sin.

Romans 6:1 What then shall we say? Shall we continue in sin so that grace may increase? By no means!

But the reality is, Christians still cheat, lie, covet, hate, steal, dishonor parents, lust, have idols. You mean to tell me you have never lied, cheated, hated, or put other things before God after becoming a Christian? I know I have. and I am not proud, but beg God for forgiveness for my weaknesses and short comings and for God to give me the strength to overcome in the future. Every day I war against the desire of the flesh, constantly dying to the self.

Romans 7:18-20 I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my flesh; for I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. 19For I do not do the good I want to do. Instead, I keep on doing the evil I do not want to do. 20And if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

But thanks be to God!
Romans 7:24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25Thanks be to God, through Jesus Christ our Lord!

It is your claim that we have an advocate in Jesus if we commit willful sin which is wrong and apathetic. No! Willfully sinning after becoming born again is trampling on the blood of Jesus and the Spirit of Grace. There is no advocate, just as there is no further sacrifice.

 

[Soyeong]

I'm only answering this quoted portion of your post because this statement is absolutely wrong and absolutely unbiblical.

So much so I am not reading the rest of what you've written.

The Standard of what is and is not sin is NOT the law It is love.
.

Matthew 22:36-40 on Love hangs all the law and the Prophets..

Romans 13:10 - love is the fulfillment because it does no harm.

There is no law under the new covenant that is not fulfilled if you love, first the Lord God with all our heart and all our soul and all our mind, then our neighbor as ourselves.

If you love your neighbor you'll not commit any sin against anyone or God, if you love God you'll not commit any sin against Him. You'll not put anything before Him, nor have any idol's, you'll be happy with your sustenance, not covet etc etc etc.

Romans 13:8-14 in short, Romans 10:4

Unlike the law, love is a burden that is light, because God fills us with His love when we believe on Jesus as Lord and Savior.

In Romans 3:20, the Law gives us knowledge of what sin is, in Romans 7:7, Paul said that he would not have known what sin is if it weren't for the Law, and in 1 John 3:4, sin is defined as the transgression of the Law, so I don't see you can deny that God's Law is the standard of what sin is.

Saying that love is the standard of what sin is not describe a different standard than the Law, but rather it is just another way of describing the same standard. In Deuteronomy 10:12-11:1, the way to love God with all of heart and soul is by obeying His commandments. In 1 John 5:3, to love God it to obey His commandments, which are not burdensome. In Matthew 22:36-40, the reason why the greatest two commands are the greatest is because they summarize all of the other commands and the reason why all of the other commands hang on the greatest two is because they are all examples of what it looks like to correctly obey them. For example, obedience to the command to help the poor looks exactly like obedience to the command to love our neighbor, so the command to love does not replace the other commands, but rather it is the essence of the other commands, so love fulfills the Law because that it what it is essentially about how to do and God's Law is the Law of Love. In other words, Christ expressed his love for the Father and for his neighbor through his actions and that that looked like was complete obedience to the Law, and that is how we are to love as he loved us.

Please finish reading my post.

 

[Hazelelponi]

It is your claim that we have an advocate in Jesus if we commit willful sin which is wrong and apathetic. No! Willfully sinning after becoming born again is trampling on the blood of Jesus and the Spirit of Grace. There is no advocate, just as there is no further sacrifice.

If you have the Holy Spirit then all sin is willful. All of it.

https://www.christianforums.com/thr...old-covenant-end.8078338/page-3#post-73091158

^^^ you agreed with my above post. So I'm going on this premise, that you understand that portion of the new covenant.

Prior to committing sin the Holy Spirit warns us, tells us x is wrong to do and to avoid x.

If, for any reason you still do x, then you have done so with full knowledge, and any time you do a thing with full knowledge then it was willful.

We are human, we are faulty. There are going to be times someone still does x.

God forgives us even so, if we go to God with a contrite spirit in full repentance..

Your doctrine attempt to deny God's people of forgiveness, and cut them off from the Throne of God.

Now, thank God you and your doctrine doesn't control who receives forgiveness from the Throne of God or else we'd all be in hell, but this is the point. There is no excuse for any sin, all sin if full of the Holy Spirit is willfull.

And, the fact is, there is still forgiveness for God's people even still so long as the repentance is sincere.

 

[claninja]

It is your claim that we have an advocate in Jesus if we commit willful sin

Correct, but not just my claim, John claims that as well. Notice John doesn't state 'intentional' sin or 'unintentional' sin, just sin.
1 John 2:1 My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One.

Was John writing so that the 'dear children' would not 'unintentionally sin'?
1 John 2:1 My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin.

which is wrong and apathetic.

It is only wrong and apathetic to teach that it is ok to intentionally sin or to continue to intentionally sin.
Romans 6:1 What then shall we say? Shall we continue in sin so that grace may increase? By no means!

Willfully sinning after becoming born again is trampling on the blood of Jesus and the Spirit of Grace. There is no advocate, just as there is no further sacrifice.

This is taking Hebrews 10:26 out of context and making a yoke that no Christian can carry.

So you have never lied, cheated, hated, put things before God, stole, coveted....after becoming a Christian?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

If the old law ended at Christ's death, how could it be fading away long after Christ's death?
2 Corinthians 3:7 Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses’ face because of its glory, which is fading away.

2 Corinthians 3:7 in the KJV says,
"But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away."

It does not say fading away. It says glory was to be done away (past tense).

2 Corinthians 3:11 For if what is fading away came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.

The KJV says,
"For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious." (2 Corinthians 3:11).

It says, that which is done away (past tense) and not that which is fading away.

Hebrews 8:13 In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

"In that he saith, "A new covenant," he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away." (Hebrews 8:13).

The author of Hebrews is interpreting the meaning of Jesus's words "A New Covenant" when He spoke them at the Lord's supper!

For Jesus said at the Lord's supper (Before His crucifixion to his disciples):
"For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." (Matthew 26:28).

So the author of Hebrews in Hebrews 8:13 is describing the meaning of what Jesus meant by the words "the New Testament" (i.e. "A New Covenant") at the timing of the Lord's supper. For at the time of the Lord's supper, when Jesus said the words "The New Testament" the author of Hebrews was telling us the meaning of what Jesus meant in that moment, which is: "That which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away." Jesus is speaking of the Old Covenant vanishing away at the Lord's supper by saying the words: "A New Covenant" (or "The New Testament"). How so? Well, because when Jesus died upon the cross, the temple veil was torn from top to bottom letting us know that the laws on the animal sacrifices and the priesthood had ended.

If the old law ended at Christ's death, how could there be those under the old covenant persecuting those under the new covenant long after Christ's death?

Galatians 4:24-25,29 24Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar. 25Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia;e she corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. just as at that time he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now

I don't see how your question makes any sense or how this passage proves your position. This passage is saying that the son of Hagar is from Mt. Sinai who is in bondage and the children of the promise if of Jerusalem from above who is free.

1. Jerusalem (Isaac - Child of the Free) (Who is above).
2. Mt. Sinai (Ishmael - Child of Bondage) (Who is from below).

Ishmael persecuted Isaac (Who was of the Spirit).
So this proves that the Jews (Who were stuck under trying to be justified by following the Old Law alone without God's grace) were persecuting Christians who were free. They were also trying to convince Christians to be circumcised; However, Paul says if any man seeks to be circumcised, Christ will profit them nothing (Galatians 5:2). So this passage does not prove that the Old Covenant was still in effect.

If the old law ended at Christ's death, why did Paul have to die to it after Christ's death?
Romans 7: 4-6 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. 5For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. 6But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.

First, Paul is talking about how we are dead to sin in Christ through baptism. If you were to skip back to the previous chapter it talks about this.

For Romans 6:1-3 says,
1 "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?"

Second, Paul says we have died to the Law by the body of Christ in Romans 7:4 (of which you quoted). Romans 7:6 says we have been delivered from the Law. So we are not under the Law according to these verses.

Three, Romans 7:6 also says,
"serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter."

This means we are not to serve according to the oldness of the letter (Meaning the Old Covenant Law of Moses) and we are to serve in newness of spirit (i.e. the New Covenant teachings of Jesus Christ and His followers).

 

[claninja]

2 Corinthians 3:7 in the KJV says,
"But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away."

It does not say fading away. It says glory was to be done away (past tense).

Incorrect, the greek word is katargoumenēn καταργουμένην, which is a present participle. It is present. It is literally translated as 'is fading'

The KJV says,
"For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious." (2 Corinthians 3:11).

It says, that which is done away (past tense) and not that which is fading away.

Incorrect, the greek word is katargoumenon καταργούμενον, which is a present participle. it is literally translated as 'is fading away'

"In that he saith, "A new covenant," he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away." (Hebrews 8:13).

Jesus is saying this shortly before the cross.

For Jesus said at the Lord's supper (Before His crucifixion to his disciples):
"For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." (Matthew 26:28).

Meaning, the author of Hebrews in Hebrews 8:13 is describing the meaning of what Jesus meant by the words "New Testament" (i.e. New Covenant) at the timing of the Lord's supper. For at the time of the Lord's supper, when Jesus said the words "New Testament" the author of Hebrews was telling us the meaning of what Jesus meant in that moment, which is: "That which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away." Jesus is speaking of the Old Covenant vanishing away at the Lord's supper by saying the words: "New Covenant" (or "New Testament"). How so? Well, because when Jesus died upon the cross, the temple veil was torn from top to bottom letting us know that the laws on the animal sacrifices and the priesthood had ended.

Let's look at the tense of the verbs in hebrews 8:13
In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is growing old and aging is ready to vanish away.

He has made obsolete - perfect indicative active - past tense
pepalaiōken πεπαλαίωκεν

Growing old - present participle - present tense
palaioumenon παλαιούμενον

Aging - present participle - present tense
gēraskon γηράσκον

Vanish away - Present participle - present tense
aphanismou ἀφανισμοῦ.

I don't see how your question makes any sense or how this passage proves your position.

How could their be 2 peoples and under 2 different covenants, if the old was done away with.

Additionally are there any verses that specifically state the old covenant was done away with at the cross?

First, Paul is talking about how we are dead to sin in Christ through baptism. If you were to skip back to the previous chapter it talks about this.

Just go back to the beginning of chapter 7, paul is speaking specifically to the Jews. A jew couldn't be bound to the law and to Christ, that would be adultery. How could a Jew be bound to law after the cross, if it ended when Christ died?

Romans 7:1-3 Or do you not know, brothersa—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? 2For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage.b 3Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress.

This means we are not to serve according to the oldness of the letter (Meaning the Old Covenant Law of Moses) and we are to serve in newness of spirit (i.e. the New Covenant teachings of Jesus Christ and His followers).

For us, even if we wanted to attempt to serve the law of Moses in this present day, we couldn't as the temple was destroyed in 70 ad. It is literally impossible to follow the law of moses today.

 

[betterorworse]

Jesus is like the "salvation for dummies" realized.


God gave Moses laws to help people avoid wickedness and they rejected them, so God gave us Jesus to show it to those who want proof.