have no right to insert any other parties into these covenants. One has its basis in works

and law-keeping, and the other in divine grace.

Because the New Covenant operates on the principle of grace, many assume that this

covenant must be introduced whenever God deals in grace with sinners. But we should

remember that God can have dealings of grace with such without making any covenant

with them and such is the case with every member of the Body of Christ upon whom

riches of grace are showered (Eph. 1: 6-8). We therefore find no mention of the New

Covenant in Ephesians or in any of the prison letters of Paul, for, by this time, Israel, the

human party in the New Covenant, had passed into spiritual darkness and now was in

unbelief (Acts 28: 25-28) and, in the new man now being formed (Eph. 2: 15), Israel

as a nation does not exist. In it there is neither Jew nor Gentile as such. All such

distinctions have vanished. Saving grace administered by covenant is only necessary to

those who had already been dealt with by covenant, i.e. Israel (Jeremiah 31: 31-34;

Romans 9: 4).  Gentiles were `strangers from the covenants' (Eph. 2: 12) and can be

reached and saved by grace without the necessity for any covenant.

It is important to realize that both Old and New Covenants are national. Israel the

nation is at the centre of both (Exod. 19: 5, 6; Jer. 31: 36).  Saved Gentiles in the

Acts period who were like wild olive grafts into the true (Rom. 11: 16-21) and therefore

partook of Israel's covenant privileges, shared in the New Covenant blessings, but we

cannot perpetuate this condition of things while Israel is dead spiritually and unusable by

God. The New Covenant touches the heart upon which God Himself writes His precepts

(Jer. 31: 33) whereas all through this age, Israel's heart has been `gross' through their

rejection of God's offer of mercy (Acts 3: 19-26) and so they cannot `understand with

their heart' (Acts 28: 27). This is the absolute negation of the New Covenant and it

cannot be operating under such conditions when the main party which it touches, Israel,

has a blinded and hardened mind. In this dispensation of grace (Eph. 3: 2) God can

deal directly with sinners, either Jew or Gentile, in grace on the basis of the Lord's

all-sufficient redemptive work on the cross and there is no need to bring any thought of a

covenant in here. It is far better to keep accurately to the inspired Word and put both

these covenants where God puts them, i.e. with Israel the nation at the centre of both.

It should hardly be necessary to say that the word `testament' in II Cor. 3: should be

rendered `covenant' right through the chapter. Paul is not dealing with will-making but

with the two covenants which have such a prominent part in Holy Writ and to emphasize

the superiority of the New Covenant over the Old, he sets out a series of contrasts to

make this clear. At this point it would be as well to point out that when he says `the letter

killeth, but the spirit giveth life' (3: 6) he is not dealing with the interpretation of

Scripture, referring to a literal or spiritualizing method as many people think when they

quote (or rather misquote) this verse to support the idea that the Bible must not be read

literally. They should realize that `the letter' refers to the Old Covenant of law, the

breaking of which led to death and being under the curse (Rom. 7: 9, 10; Gal. 3: 10).

It was indeed the `letter that killeth' and the `ministration of death', whereas the New

Covenant, where human works and merit are disregarded and God alone works in grace

bringing forgiveness and life, can truly be designated as the spirit which giveth life.