Chapter Three

  Dr. Jay Snell Newsletter Feed and Free Bonuses  

The Second Great Error Upon Which This Current, Christian Theology of Denial Perches Precariously, Is Misunderstanding The Term "New" In "New Covenant" To Mean "New in Time," When In Fact It Does Not

The God-Looked-Down Theory gets rid of the salvation-by-works doctrine of the Great Disconnect Theory, by simply erecting a "brand new covenant" (disconnected from Abraham) based on the extremely misleading translations of Jeremiah 31:31 and quoted in Hebrews 8:8. These passages state from the English translations that, “…I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah...." But the Hebrew and Greek words translated "new" in these two passages do not necessarily mean "new in time." Neither does the expression "will make" mean "startup" in Hebrew or Greek. Instead, "will make" means just the opposite of "start up something new." Rather, it means "to complete something that already is." But now, let's look at this "brand new covenant" presented to us by traditional, Christian theology that has accepted as fact the greatest theological blunder in Old Testament history.

Is the New Covenant Really New?

The new covenant, taught by Jeremiah in the Old Testament and by Jesus, Paul, and the writer of the Book of Hebrews in the New Testament, is the renewal, restoration, and completion of the covenant God made with Abraham. Consequently, no such thing as a "new" covenant exists.

Jeremiah, however, seems to contradict this statement. He said, "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them our of the land of Egypt, which my covenant, they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:" (Jeremiah 31:31-32). Then he explains the characteristics of this new covenant that God will someday make with them. "But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts: and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more" (Jeremiah 31:33-34).

Jesus, Paul, and the writer of Hebrews also seem to contradict our assertion of no "new" covenant. Jesus sounded the new covenant theme in the upper room as he brake the bread and passed the cup. He said, "This is my blood of the new testament (covenant), which is shed for many for the remission of sins" (Matthew 26:28). He repeated the same statement almost verbatim in Mark 14:24 and Luke 22:20. (The Greek word for covenant is DIATHAKA and is translated in the King James Bible by both "covenant" and "testament".) The Apostle Paul also seems to contradict this position of no "new" covenant. While instructing the Church at Corinth concerning the Lord's Supper, he Quotes Jesus, “After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament (covenant) in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me" (1 Corinthians 11:25). In his second letter to the same Church, he said that God "...hath made us able ministers of the new testament (covenant)...." (2 Corinthians 3:6). The writer of the Book of Hebrews quotes Jeremiah 31:31-34 almost word for word concerning the new covenant. In Hebrews 8:13 he says, "In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old." Finally, in Hebrews 9:15 and 12:24, he says that Jesus is the mediator of this new covenant. "And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament (covenant), that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance" (Hebrews 9:15). "And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel" (Hebrews 12:24).

The above ten Scriptures emphatically declare a new covenant. To believe otherwise is to repudiate all ten of them. How can we justify our contention that no such thing as a new covenant exists, when Jeremiah, Jesus, Paul, and the writer to Hebrews say there is? Our justification is this: the contradiction is only apparent, and not real. This appearance is caused by the translation of two Greek words and one Hebrew word with the English word "new." This chapter will demonstrate that these words contain shades of meaning which cannot be adequately translated just by our English word "new." We begin with the two Greek words, NEOS and KAINOS.

NEOS means new in time. It represents something as being chronologically new. It denotes that which just came into being. NEOS is used when a time comparison is called for: to show that something is more recent than that which began at an earlier date.

KAINOS, on the other hand, denotes that which is qualitatively new or different. It denotes that which is not necessarily new in time, but that which has existed for some time. Then a change occurs in its quality or character, however slight, that makes it different, qualitatively, from what it was before. This difference in quality makes it new in the sense of KAINOS. This difference makes it new, not in time, but in quality. In other words, something could be a hundred years old and acquire a new and different quality, and it would be considered new in the sense of KAINOS.

Nine Major Greek Dictionaries Declare That "New" in "New Covenant," Does Not Mean "New in Time,"
but "New in Quality"

        Thayer says, "NEOS denotes the new primarily in reference to time, the young, recent; KAINOS denotes the new primarily in reference to quality, the fresh, the unworn" (JHT p. 318). The One Volume Theological Dictionary of The New Testament says, "As distinct from NEOS, new in time, KAINOS means new in nature with an implication of better" (TDNT p .388). Vine states, "KAINOS denotes new, of that which is unaccustomed or unused, not new in time, recent, but new as to form or quality, of different nature from what is contrasted as old" (WEV III p. 109). "NEOS signifies new in respect of time, that which is recent; it is used of the young and so translated, especially the comparative degree "younger". NEOS and KAINOS are sometimes used of the same thing, but there is a difference" (WEV III p. 110).

        Walter Bauer says that KAINOS means new, "(1) in the sense unused... (2) in the sense of something not previously present, unknown, strange, remarkable, also with the connotation of the marvelous or unheard-of.,.." (BAG p. 394).

Moulton and Milligan declare that the distinction between KAINOS and NEOS is retained in papyrus (non - biblical documents) usage. They say, "Papyrus usage hardly tends to sharpen the distinction between KAINOS and NEOS" (MM p. 314). In other words, the papyrus utilizes the sharp distinction existing between these two words.

        Cremer marks the distinction between KAINOS and NEOS. He states that KAINOS is "new, and that, too, in opposition to what has already existed, is known, has been used and consumed: KAINOS therefore looks backwards, whereas its synonym NEOS looks forwards = young, fresh; KAINOS = not yet having been; NEOS = not having been long" (HC p. 321). In other words, KAINOS is the opposite of something that previously existed that is worn out, used, or consumed. Rather, KAINOS would describe something that previously existed but is "not yet having been worn, consumed, etc."

The condition of the American automobile industry in the early 1980's illustrates the distinction between these two words. Sales of cars were so poor one year that the manufacturers had hundreds of unsold new cars left in their inventories at the end of the model year. Some of those "brand-new, year-old" cars did not sell until nearly a year later. These cars were a year old but were still "brand new." How can this be? When they were sold, they were not new in time (NEOS) or "not having been long." But they were new in quality (KAINOS) in that “they were not yet owned," or to quote Cremer above, they were "not yet having been" owned.

Ralph Earle sees the distinction between NEOS and KAINOS. He quotes Trench, cited below, in his discussion of the new bottles (KAINOS) in Mark 2:22. Then, he says, "The best translation at the end of the verse is "fresh wineskins" (PE p. 33). He also quotes Trench in his discussion of the KAINOS man in Ephesians 4:24. Then, he says, "So, "the new man" refers to the new quality of life that comes with Christ's entrance into the human heart" (RE pp. 315-316).

        The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology says that NEOS is the "...new, young and previously non existent...." It states further that KAINOS is "...new in the qualitative sense of something previously unknown, unprecedented, marvelous" (NID II p. 669). "But the New Testament has significantly used KAINOS with its more qualitative sense in order to give expression to the new character of the advent of Christ." KAINOS is derived from the root QEN, "turn out fresh,"... and denotes that which is new in its own way. "In secular usage KAINOS denotes that which is qualitatively new as compared with what has existed until now, that which is better than the old, whereas NEOS is used temporarily for that which has just made its appearance” (NID II pp. 669-670).

Having defined the distinction between NEOS and KAINOS correctly, this same dictionary contradicts its own definitions of these two words by blurring their distinctions in stating they are sometimes synonymous to each other. "In the course of time the differences of meaning between NEOS and KAINOS became blurred, even to the point of occasional synonymity" (NID II p. 669). "The Synoptics use KAINOS from time to time with the same meaning as NEOS...." (NID II p. 671). "There is no strict differentiation between NEOS and the generally synonymously used adjectives KAINOS and PROSPHATOS...." (NID II p. 674). In other words, this dictionary contradicts its own definition of NEOS and KAINOS. But, this won't wash. And the verses they list to prove their point of synonymity do not prove their point at all. Every occurrence of KAINOS in the New Testament doesn't deviate one bit from the actual definition: KAINOS describes the qualitatively new while NEOS describes the chronologically new. Later in this chapter we examine every instance of KAINOS in the Greek New Testament so the readers can determine for themselves the distinction between KAINOS and NEOS. An examination of these passages should be undertaken from the view that no synonymity occurs.

Even this same dictionary recognizes the weakness of its assertion of synonymity. The last sentence in its articles of KAINOS-NEOS contradicts its previous contradiction of the definitions of these two words. It states that, "Even though the word groups NEOS and KAINOS are largely used synonymously, the observation may still be made that NEOS tends to stress the reality of salvation in the present, whereas KAINOS emphasizes more strongly the character of eschatological fulfillments." (NID II p. 676). Stripping away the fluff from this statement, this author equates NEOS with "present," which is "new" or "more recent" in time. And he equates KAINOS with "character" or "quality." In their so-called synonymous use, NEOS still means new in time and KAINOS still means new in character. If these distinctions can still be observed in their so-called synonymous occurrences, then in fact, these words are not synonymous at all.

Furthermore, their statement that PROSPHATOS, as well as KAINOS, are synonyms for NEOS devastates their contention for synonymity. PROSPHATOS means "freshly slain or slaughtered." The author of Hebrews used it in Hebrews 10:20, depicting Christ as the "new" and living way. "New" is the translation of PROSPHATOS. Jesus, as the way to God, was "recently slain" or "freshly slaughtered," but due to his resurrection, he is still living. He was “recently slaughtered” but living nonetheless. If "recently slaughtered" or PROSPHATOS is a synonym for NEOS which means "new in time," rather than say "The man built a NEOS house," we should be able to substitute PROSPHATOS for NEOS, and declare "The man built a 'recently slaughtered' house." Obviously, this cannot be done. Therefore, neither KAINOS nor PROSPHATOS is a synonym of NEOS.

Trench has an excellent article on NEOS and KAINOS. He declares, "Some have denied that any difference can in the New Testament be traced between these two words. They derive a certain, plausible support for this denial from the fact that manifestly NEOS and KAINOS, both rendered “new” in our version, are often interchangeably used...the words, it is contended, are evidently of the same force and significance. This. however, by no means follows, and in fact is not the case" (RCT p. 219).

The above authorities all concur: NEOS means new in time, while KAINOS means new in quality. Is this distinction in Scripture? The following examples show that it is.

Consider the case of the new tomb of Joseph of Arimathea where they placed the body of Jesus. Joseph "laid it in his own new tomb (KAINOS), which he had hewn out in the rock:..." (Matthew 27:60). "Now in the place where he was crucified, there was a garden: and in the garden a new (KAINOS) sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid" (John 19:41). In both verses, Matthew and John used the Greek word KAINOS. Why didn't they use the word NEOS, since it was a "new" tomb? Because the tomb was not new in time. Joseph had hewn it out, but he could have hewn it twenty or thirty years before they placed Jesus in it. How could it be said that it was new in time when it was probably several years old? It couldn't!

It was, instead, qualitatively new. It was unused, unworn. This quality of being unworn, unused, makes the tomb new in the sense of KAINOS. The sepulchre was already in existence, having been there for some time (KAINOS describes that which is already in existence.) Then, an additional quality or the embellishment of some present quality or characteristic causes a difference in it, however slight. This slight, qualitative difference renders it new in the sense of KAINOS. In this case, the grave was not new in time, NEOS, for it had been hewn from the rock prior to Jesus' use of it, but it was new in quality, KAINOS, since it was not used yet.

Sometimes both words are used to describe the same thing. A prime example is Paul's doctrine of the "new" man in Colossians 3:10 and Ephesians 4:24. How is this possible, using both words to describe the same thing, considering the above distinctions between the two words? The answer is that the new (KAINOS) man mentioned in Ephesians 4:24 is viewed from the standpoint of the qualitative changes brought about by his salvation experience. In the context of Ephesians 4:24, the new (KAINOS) man is viewed as being "created in righteousness and true holiness." This is the new creation of 2 Corinthians 5:17. Assume the man described in the above passage was 35 years old when he received Jesus as Savior. He certainly would not be considered new in time (NEOS); he has been in existence for 35 years. However, his salvation experience completely changes his character so that he now possesses new qualities, which are "righteousness and true holiness." These qualities are now new within him and denoted by the word KAINOS.

But, in Colossians 3:10, Paul is making a time comparison to the old man in verse 9. The "old man" dates back to Adam. The "old man" has now been put off and the "new (NEOS) man" has now been put on. The new (NEOS) man is more recent in time than Adam or the old man. As in this example, NEOS is always used when comparisons of time are made contrasting that which is recent, to that which is old.

A classic example of a time comparison using NEOS is Hebrews 12:24. This verse calls Jesus the mediator of the new (NEOS) covenant. This is the only instance in the New Testament where NEOS describes the new covenant. In this context, the new covenant is called NEOS because it is being compared to the Mosaic era, which began nearly 2000 years before. Trench concurs with this conclusion. He says, "So, too, the covenant of which Christ is the mediator is a NEOS covenant, as compared with the Mosaic, confirmed nearly 2000 years before...." (RCT p. 225). Consequently, when both words are used to describe the same thing, NEOS views it from the perspective of time, whereas KAINOS views it from the perspective of a qualitative difference, which means qualitative newness.

Nine of the ten new covenant passages cited above are from the New Testament, and eight of the nine use KAINOS to characterize the new covenant. All eight teach the same thing: there is a preexisting covenant to which Jesus gave a qualitative difference, making it new in the sense of KAINOS. This covenant is not new in time. It was in existence before the time of Jesus. He did something unique to it, however, improving its quality, making it KAINOS.

The Hebrew Word for "New" in "New Covenant," Primarily Means "New in Quality," not "New in Time"

But what about Jeremiah 31:31? This passage is written in Hebrew. The word translated "new" in this verse is the Hebrew word KHAWDASH, the root Meaning of which means to “renew, repair, rebuild, and restore, with secondary, adjectival meanings of new and fresh" (TWOT,I pp. 265-266). The following examples from the Old Testament support this definition. In Psalms 51:10, David asked God to, "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me." The word translated "renew" is the same Hebrew root, KHAWDASH, used by Jeremiah. David already possessed his spirit. He was asking for a renewal of what he already had. In 2 Chronicles 24:4, we find that "Joash was minded to repair the house of the Lord," which had been allowed to deteriorate. The house of the Lord, in this verse, was already in existence. It was run down and in need of restoration. So, Joash collected money and in 2 Chronicles 24:12, "...the king and Jehoiada gave it to such as did the work of the service of the house of the Lord, and hired masons and carpenters to repair the house of the Lord...." In both verses, "repair" is the translation of KHAW- DASH, the same Hebrew root used by Jeremiah to depict his "new" covenant. In both verses, there is a renewal, a repairing, a restoring of that which was already in existence.

Unless the context indicates otherwise, this same distinction obtains in the derivative, adjectival use of the word. The adjective form is usually translated "new." Exodus 1:8 says, "Now there arose up a new king over Egypt which knew not Joseph." This same root, KHAWDASH, is translated “new” here, also. The person who became king was not new in time since he was several years old. However, he was new to the office of king. He was new in that he was now kingly, whereas before, he was not. When Deborah was judge in Israel, Judges 5:8 informs us, "They chose new gods...." KHAWDASH is translated "new." But, the gods were not new in time. They had been around for centuries. The newness of the gods in this passage lies in this: they were new to the choice of the people. The gods were now chosen, whereas before they were not. In Judges 16:11, Samson tells Delilah that he would be as weak as other men if they "...bind me fast with new ropes that never were occupied...." "New" is the translation of the adjective form of KHAWDASH. The ropes are not new in time, they were qualitatively new in that they were not yet occupied or used. In 1 Kings 11:29, Ahijah "had clad himself with a new garment." KHAWDASH is used again. The new garment is not new in time since it was not manufactured at that moment. It was new in that it was unused, unworn, by Ahijah.

Long before the birth of Christ, a group of scholars translated the Hebrew Old Testament into Greek. This translation was called "The Septuagint," and designated it by the symbol LXX. These scholars translated KHAWDASH in Jeremiah 31:31 with the Greek word KAINOS. The understood the practical identity between the two words. They understood the root meaning of KHAWDASH to denote a renewal, a restoration of that which is. They also recognized that the adjective form of KHAWDASH, translated "new," describes a qualitative newness of that which is, by marking it off as unused, unworn, not consumed, and not yet marred with age. As such, KHAWDASH is practically identical with KAINOS, which also marks off that which is, as unused, unknown, etc.

There is no occurrence of KAINOS in the Greek New Testament that does not "mark off that which is, as unused, or with a new twist. etc." Also, no occurrence of KAINOS in the Greek text blurs the above, described distinction between KAINOS and NEOS.

As a consequence of the sharp, welldefined, difference between "new" in time and "new" in quality, it is obvious that Jeremiah spoke about a covenant already in existence that will become new in character. It is just as obvious that Jesus spoke of a covenant already in existence, even as he broke breadand passed the cup in the upper room, that he was about to make new in quality. Paul taught us in both the Corinthian letters about an existing covenant that Jesus had made new in quality. The writer to the Hebrews, quoting Jeremiah's new covenant, declares that Jesus made this very same covenant, spoken of by Jeremiah, new in character and quality and became the Forerunner and Mediator of it.

The purpose of this work is to show that the preexisting covenant that Jeremiah spoke of and Jesus completed is none other than the covenant God made with Abraham, that the completed Abrahamic Covenant is still in effect, and the provisions of that covenant, specifically, salvation, health, and prosperity are the rights of every Christian at this present hour.

The preceding word study demonstrates a primary reason why some view the Church honestly, but mistakenly, as a "brand new" covenant or entity in the plan of God. There are other reasons which are dealt with in this volume, but the misunderstanding caused by the English word “new” as the translation of KAINOS and KHAWDASH is a primary one. We have looked previously at the reaction of the New Testament writers to one of the greatest theological blunders of all time. This mistake, called in this work, "The Great Disconnect Theory," is dealt with at length in chapter one. This theory serves as a foundation for examining the other reasons why many mistakenly view the Church as a "brand new" covenant, unaware that this new covenant is the historic unfoldment of the completed Abrahamic Covenant, and that the temporal and spiritual blessings of Abraham are the Christians' present inheritance.

Finally, how many sermons or Sunday school lessons have you learned explaining the difference between these two Greek words translated "new"? How many sermons or Sunday school lessons have you heard that declared the new covenant is "new in quality" but not "new in time"? Can the reader be sure that sermons and lessons that do not explain the above, were not based on The God-Looked-Down Theory.

A Brief Study of Every New Testament Occurrence of KAINOS (New in Quality) Shows That "New" in New Covenant, " Means "New in Quality," not "New in Time"

Every occurrence of KAINOS in the Greek New Testament is listed below, The distinction described above between KAINOS and NEOS is present in every occurrence. In addition, there is no incident of KAINOS in the Greek New Testament that does not "mark off" the word it modifies in one of two ways:

1. KAINOS "marks off" that which exists already as "new in quality" by designating that it is not worn yet, not used yet, not consumed yet, etc.

2. KAINOS "marks off" that which exists already as "new in quality" after some new "twist" or "characteristic" has been added to it that it did not possess before.

In the discussion below of every occurrence of KAINOS in the Greek New Testament, one of the above two "mark offs" will be observed. There are no exceptions. And, in many of the verses we examine, there are more interpretive possibilities than we show here. The reader may apply the two "mark offs" to each verse for even more possibilities. This section can be skipped, and the reader can go to the next chapter, referring to this material at his/her leisure.

New Bottles (Matthew 9:17) - NEOS would have denoted the bottles to have been of recent manufacture, i.e., new in time. On the other hand, KAINOS denotes only that they were "not used yet." The bottles could have been manufactured for quite a while. See Mark 2:22 below for a fuller discussion 

New Things out of the Treasure (Matthew 13:52) - Two kinds of things can be brought out of the disciples' treasure: (1) Things that are worn out or wearing out by age. This is defined by PALAIOS (v. 52). PALAIOS is translated in KJV by "old" and means "worn out" or "wearing out with age." (2) The other things that can be brought out of the disciples' treasure are not things that are new in time (NEOS), but things already contained in the treasure "not worn or wearing out with age yet," (KAINOS). Trench says that KAINOS, "not worn out with age yet," is absolutely demanded as the opposite of PALAIOS when PALAIOS is used in the sense of “worn or wearing out with age." He states, "As often as PALAIOS is employed to connote that which is worn out, or wearing out by age, it will absolutely demand KAINOS as its opposite" (RCT p. 66). The new things are not new in time (NEOS) but new in the sense of "not worn or wearing out yet" (KAINOS) (RCT p. 253).

New Fruit of the Vine (Matthew 26:29) - At the last supper, Jesus instituted the fruit of the vine (wine) as the symbol of his blood which is shed for many. This institution of the wine as the symbol of his blood was "brand new" at that particular moment in time. That very same night, his disciples drank of the wine as the new symbol. Indeed, his followers have been drinking of this symbol ever since. Jesus, however, refused to drink of the wine as the symbol of his blood. He said that someday he would drink it "new" with them in his Father's kingdom. He did not mean that the wine would be new in time when he drank it. This would require NEOS rather than KAINOS. Neither did he mean that the symbolizing of the wine as his blood would be new in time. This occurred in the past in the upper room. Instead, wine as the symbol of his blood was "not drunk yet" (KAINOS) by our Lord in the upper room. Indeed, the symbolized wine is to remain "not drunk yet" by our Lord "until the kingdom of God shall come" (Luke 22:18). NEOS would denote new in time, whereas KAINOS here denotes "not drunk by Jesus yet, as the symbol of his blood."

New Tomb (Matthew 27:60) - We noted earlier that the tomb could be decades old. It was, however, "not used yet," (KAINOS), when they placed Jesus' body in it.

New Doctrine (Mark 1:27) - In the synagogue, Jesus did two things with authority. He taught with authority and he cast out demons with authority (vv. 22 and 26). The new doctrine (v. 27) was not new in time since Mark did not use NEOS. Jesus' doctrine had been around for a long time. It was the doctrine of the Old Testament. One such qualitative difference or newness in Jesus' teaching of the Old Testament is this: prior to Jesus, the scribes had "not yet taught it as having authority," (KAINOS). Jesus was the authority of the Old Testament and the "newness" of his teaching of the "doctrine" of the Old Testament was that his teaching had "authority," compared to the scribes who "had not yet taught it with authority" (KAINOS).

New Cloth (Mark 2:21) - This passage contains the same play on words as Matthew 13:52. There, we noted earlier that "old" is the translation of PALAIOS which means "wearing out with age." We also noted that this usage demands KAINOS as its opposite. Jesus did not say here that the sewed cloth is new in time (NEOS). He said one doesn't sew a piece of cloth that's "not worn out yet" (KAINOS) on a piece of cloth that is worn out with age (PALAIOS). The sewed piece could be quite old and "not worn out yet;" hence, KAINOS.

New Bottles (Mark 2:22) - This verse contains the same words as Mark 2:21, Matthew 9:17; and 13:52. But, in addition, NEOS and KAINOS are used in the same sentence. Jesus said that no one puts wine that is new in time (NEOS) into bottles that are worn with age (PALAIOS). Rather, wine that is new in time (NEOS) is put into bottles that are "not worn yet" (KAINOS). Although the wine in this sentence is new in time, the bottles were not. Regardless of how old they migh have been before using, they were "not worn or not used yet."

New Fruit of the Vine (Mark 14:25) - See the identical discussion above for Matthew 26:29.

New Tongues (Mark 16:17) - The tongues are not new in time (NEOS). In this context, believers are to be accompanied by signs following. One sign is new (KAINOS) tongues. If "tongues" refers to the physical organ of the tongue, the passage would mean organs that are "not used as an instrument of signs yet" (KAINOS). If "tongues" refers to languages, then the passage would mean languages "not spoken as a sign yet" (KAINOS).

New Piece (Luke 5:36) - See the discussion of Mark 2:21 above.

New Bottles (Luke 5:38) - See the discussion of Mark 2:22 above.

New Covenant (Luke 22:20) - The covenant was not new in time (NEOS). It was to be new in quality (KAINOS) in that it was "not complete yet." In a subsequent chapter, we shall deal at length with the completion of the Abrahamic Covenant by Jesus, the Seed of Abraham.

New Commandment (John 13:34) - The commandment to love one another is not new in time (NEOS) since this commandment is the very heart of the Old Testament. Jesus added a new quality (KAINOS) to the existing commandment. They were not only to obey the previously existing Old Testament Commandment of loving one another, but now, they were to obey it to the same degree that Jesus loved them. The commandment was new (KAINOS) in that it had "not been given with Jesus' love for them as the measure of their love for others, yet."

New Sepulchre (John 19:41) - See the discussion of Matthew 27:60 above.

New Doctrine (Acts 17:19) - The doctrine was Paul's preaching Jesus to them (v. 18). This message was not new in time (NEOS) but was new (KAINOS) in that it was "not familiar to their ears yet." The message was, rather, "strange things to our ears....' (v.20). It was not new in time but it was strange, different, and unfamiliar to them.

New Thing (Acts 17:21) – The thing is not new in time (NEOS). Luke does not say the Athenians wanted the latest news (NEOS), but he says they wanted something "newer." This word is KAINOTEROS, which is the comparative of KAINOS. Had the Athenians wanted something "latest in time," Luke would have used the comparative of NEOS, or NEOTERON. This would be translated by "latest news." But the Athenians wanted something qualitatively different (not numerically other) from what had gone on before. They were looking to hear the same things they had heard before except with a new, different twist to it, thereby making it qualitatively new (KAINOS).

New Testament - Covenant (1 Corinthians 11:25) - The covenant is not new in time (NEOS). It is the Abrahamic Covenant that is "not completed yet" (KAINOS). In a subsequent chapter, we explain the "completing process" of the Abrahamic Covenant.

New Testament - Covenant (2 Corinthians 3:6) - The covenant is not new in time (NEOS). This context views theAbrahamic Covenant as having been completed, an additional quality, which previously was "not present yet" (KAINOS). In other words, The Abrahamic Covenant was new (NEOS) in time in Genesis. It has been in force ever since. After two thousand years, Jesus completed it. The additional quality of “completion” makes the Abrahamic Covenant, not new in time (NEOS), but new in quality (KAINOS). We see how Jesus "completed" it in a subsequent section.

New Creation (2 Corinthians 5:17) - A man is "in Christ" at the moment of his new birth, i.e., the moment he receives Christ as his Savior. He may be a teen or an elderly person. As such, he was not created new (NEOS) in time since he has been living for several years. But at the moment of his salvation experience, his human spirit, which he has had since birth, is made new and alive to God. Previously, his human spirit had been dead towards God. This creative act of God on his preexisting spirit creates the additional quality of “spiritual life” in the human spirit. Neither the physical man or his spirit was created new in time (NEOS) at the point of new birth. Rather, God imparted by creation another quality to the human spirit which it had not possessed yet (KAINOS). With its new spiritual life, the preexisting human spirit is new in quality (KAINOS), not new in time (NEOS).

New Things (2 Corinthians 5:17) - The "old things" have passed away, but they are not annihilated. "Passed away" is the translation of PARA, which means "beside," plus ERCHOMAI, which means "to go." PARERCHOMAI means to "go by," or "pass beside," hence, "pass away." The same word is used in Luke 17:7 where Jesus is asking about one coming from work in the fields. He wants to know if his master will say to him, "Go and sit down to meat?" "Go" is the translation of PARERCHOMAI. The hired hand is not annihilated as a result of "going to eat." This word contains no thought of annihilation. It simply means to pass by a place on the map or to pass through a point in time (2 Peter 3:10-12 below). Consequently, the "old things" have "fresh coloring" (KAINOS) because of the new birth. J. H. Bernard says, "...the old thoughts of God and of sin and salvation have received fresh colouring...." (EGT III p. 71). The KAINOS creation man has the same old capacities he had before his salvation experience. He had the capacities of affections, passions, notions, apprehensions, inclinations, will, thought, counsels, and designs. Prior to the new birth, all these attributes were directed away from the things of God. But now, enabled by the Spirit, these same capacities are directed towards the things of God so that the KAINOS creation man will have "...new qualities, new apprehensions in his understanding, new inclinations in his will and affections, new thoughts, counsels, and designs" (MP III p. 616). The old things have now the "fresh coloring" of the Holy Spirit, whereas before they did not.

New Creature (Galatians 6:15) - See the discussion of 2 Corinthians 5:17.

New Man (Ephesians 2:15) - The context of Ephesians 2:11 through 3:12 deals with one subject, namely the Gentiles being included in the saved Jewish Remnant. That Remnant is pictured in this verse as a "man." This man is not new in time (NEOS) because he is composed of the saved of the ages. But now, he has a quality, an attribute, a characteristic he did not have before. Now the Gentiles are included in this Remnant man. This addition of the Gentiles to the saved Remnant makes the "man" in Ephesians 2:15 new in quality (KAINOS), not new in time (NEOS). This work elaborates on this thought throughout.

New Man (Ephesians 4:24) - See the description earlier in this chapter.

New Covenant (Hebrews 8:8) - This covenant is not new in time (NEOS). This is the completion of the Abrahamic Covenant by Jesus Christ (KAINOS). See chapter 4 on "The Completion" for a full discussion.

New Covenant (Hebrews 8:13) - This also refers to the Abrahamic Covenant in a completed state. See chapter 4 on "The Completion."

New Covenant (Hebrews 9:15) - This also refers to the Abrahamic Covenant after its completion by Jesus. See chapter 4 on "The Completion."

New Heavens and New Earth (2 Peter 3:13) - If these were new in time in this verse, NEOS would have been used. Rather, KAINOS is used which denotes a new, different quality that obtains to the heavens and the earth. The Greek text of 2 Peter 3:10-13 substantiates Peter's use of KAINOS (new in quality of that which is) rather than new in time (NEOS). In this context we see some things about (1) the heavens, (2) the elements, (3) the earth, (4) the works that are in the earth. The second coming of Christ will have a profound effect upon the relationship of these four things to both the present and future world orders.

The heavens of this present world order are pictured as the vault in which the elements of atoms, matter, molecules, stars, sun, moon, etc., are contained. "The heavens' equals "the sky." Peter shows the effects of Christ’s' second coming upon the heavens of this world order. (1) These heavens "pass away," literally "go by," the translation of PAERECHOMAI. This Greek word combines PARA, meaning beside, from which comes our word parallel, and ERCHOMAI, which means to come, to go, to pass. This word does not, however, signify "to annihilate." This same word is used in Luke 18:37, which says "Jesus passed by...." By no stretch of the imagination can we make it mean that Jesus was annihilated so that he ceased to be. He was still the same after he "passed by." (2) At the Second Coming, the heavens of this order will be set on fire. "Fire" is the translation of PUROO, which does not necessarily mean "to consume by flames." The same word is used in Revelation 3:18 where Jesus tells them to buy him gold tried in the fire. "Tried in fire is the same basic word that Peter uses to describe the heavens. In Revelation 3:18, the gold is not annihilated, it is refined, tried, purified, and cleansed of impurities. At the Second Coming, Jesus will purify the heavens in fire, in like manner. (3) The heavens are "dissolved," which is the translation of LUO, which means "to loose." When Lazarus came out of the tomb in John 11:44, Jesus said, "Loose him and let him go." "Loose" is the same word used by Peter (LUO), which is translated "dissolve." Jesus never said for Lazarus to be annihilated or dissolved. He meant for him to be loosed. In like manner, Peter never said the heavens are to be annihilated. They are simply to be “loosed” from the present scheme of things.

Peter says two things about the earth and the works therein. First, he says they are to be "utterly burned," the translation of KATAKAIO. Second, he says in verse 11 they also are to be "loosed" (LUO) from the present scheme of things. Neither of these two things concerning the earth and the works there in mean "annihilation."

Peter shows three effects of the Second Coming upon the elements of this world order: (1) They are pictured in verses 10 and 12 as melting with fervent heat. Both verses express the translation of KAUSOO, which simply means to burn. In other words the elements are seen as "burning." (2) They are seen as melting in verse 12 only. “Melt” is the translation of TAKA, which means "turn to liquid." (3) Not only are the elements being liquefied by burning, but they are also being "loosed." Whether they are annihilated or not is unclear. Perhaps the melting actually annihilates the sun, moon, and stars of this present world order. What became of the works in the earth is also unclear. Verse 13 makes no mention of the continuation of either the elements or the works. But, verse 13 speaks of an earth and the heavens, the first order of which has "gone by," and that has not only been loosed, but has been purified for the new order by the refining fires attendant to the Second Coming. The new heavens and the new earth are not new in time (NEOS). They are "not purified yet;” whereas, at the Second Coming they will have that difference, that quality of "purification," rendering them "new" in the sense of KAINOS.

New Commandment (1 John 2:7) - The commandment in this verse is the same old commandment they had from the beginning. The commandment cannot be considered even qualitatively new (KAINOS), since John said "I write no new (KAINOS) commandment to you...." (1 John 2:7).

New Commandment (1 John 2:8) - In this verse John adds a quality to the old commandment which it did not possess before (KAINOS). The old commandment is that we love our brother. (See the discussion of John 13:34 above.) The additional quality of this commandment is that John equates loving our brother with "abiding in the light" (v. 10). He also equates not loving our brother with "walking in darkness" (v. 11). In other words, the old commandment of loving our brother was "not equated with abiding in the light yet" (KAINOS); whereas, now it is.

New Commandment (2 John verse 5) - See the discussion of 1 John 2:7 above.

New Name (Revelation 2:17) - The name is not new in time (NEOS). The name has been around a while, but it is new in that it is "not written yet" (KAINOS).

New Jerusalem (Revelation 3:12) – This heavenly Jerusalem is not new in time (NEOS).  There is no way to calculate how long it has been under preparation. Even so, it is new (KAINOS), in the sense that it has "not come down out of heaven from my God yet."

New Name (Revelation 3:12) - Like the New Name of Revelation 2:17, there is no way to determine its age. However, we know it is not new in time (NEOS); only that its "not written yet" (KAINOS).

New Song (Revelation 14:3) - The song isn't new in time (NEOS), it's "not sung yet" (KAINOS).

New Heaven and Earth (Revelation 21:1) - See the discussion of 2 Peter 3:10- 12 above.

New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:2) - See the discussion of Revelation 3:12 above.

New Things (Revelation 21:5) - The things are not new in time. Previously, the things were characterized by tears, death, sorrow, crying, and pain (v. 4). They were "not free from tears, death, sorrow, crying, and pain yet" (KAINOS).

In conclusion, we find no such thing as a "brand new covenant." KAINOS prevents such a view. Rather, we find a preexisting covenant made new in quality. In the next chapter we discover what this "new" quality is. We also look at the misunderstanding caused by the English translation "will make" concerning Jeremiah's assertion "I will make a new covenant...." We shall find that "will make" doesn't mean "start-up something new.” Rather, it menas to “complete that  which is."

How many sermons and Bible lessons have you heard which fail to distinguish between "new in time" and "new in quality"? Can you be sure they were not based on the God-Looked-Down Theory?

Copyright 1996 - 2007
Date Last Updated: February 26, 2008
PO Box 59  ¦  Livingston, TX  ¦  77351
936-327-3676
http://jaysnell.org