Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John: Old Testament or New Testament?
by Garland M. Robinson
If you reject the Gospel records of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John (including Acts 1) being any part of the Lord’s New Testament, then you have to accept the conclusion that nothing the Lord said or taught while on earth is valid for the church today. That makes everything the Lord and Savior said null and void.
We received a letter that took issue with the Lord’s words regarding divorce and remarriage which was discussed in the April 2015 issue of Seek The Old Paths. In part, it reads:
“Just to keep it simple, I ask, do you believe we are under the old law? I know you will say No. Matthew through Acts 1 is old law given before the church was established on Pentecost. We are not bound by these teachings —thus your article of Divorce, Baptism, Eunuch is not valid.”
In reply, please consider the following.
Jesus the Christ lived and died during the Old Testament era. Therefore, He was amenable to the Law of Moses. However, the Scriptures teach that the New Testament replaced the Old Testament. Who among the Lord’s people would deny it? Is there anyone out there who would disagree? His life and teaching were to “take away the first that he may establish the second” (Hebrews 10:9).
Where did the second (new) Testament law come from? It came from God and was delivered by Jesus, the apostles, and other inspired writers such as Mark, Luke, James, and Jude. Those who delivered and recorded the new covenant (testament, law) were infallibly guided by the Holy Spirit (II Timothy 3:16-17; II Peter 1:20-21).
Will you deny that Jesus delivered any part of New Testament doctrine? If you reject the Gospel records of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John (including Acts 1) being any part of the Lord’s New Testament, then you have to accept the conclusion that nothing the Lord said or taught while on earth is valid for the church today. That makes everything the Lord and Savior said null and void. That leaves the entirety of the Christian Age without any words that Jesus spoke (while living on this earth) that are relevant to the world today. Therefore, nothing the Lord said or taught has anything to do with how we live! Who can imagine such a devilish and disastrous doctrine?
Are we to understand that the apostle Paul (even though guided by the Holy Spirit) did not know that the Lord’s words did not pertain to New Testament doctrine? That cannot be so because he certainly knew they applied to the church. He told the elders of the church at Ephesus that we are “...to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35). He was an inspired apostle. I choose to believe Brother Paul, who had no problem recognizing the words of Jesus, though spoken before the church began, had application to the church and the world.
Moses prophesied that when Jesus came into the world, we were to hear his words. “For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, [that] every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people” (Acts 3:22-23; cf. Deuteronomy 18:15,18-19). If people today do not hear the words of Jesus, they will be destroyed.
Acts 8:5 says that Philip “preached Christ unto them” when he went to Samaria. Are we to believe that Philip “preached Christ” but refused to teach anything the Lord taught? Shall we believe in Jesus but not believe that anything he said applies to the church? The point is this: You can’t preach Christ without preaching Christ’s Words.
Luke 16:16 is very clear. It records Jesus saying, “The law and the prophets [were] until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached...” (Luke 16:16; cf. Matthew 11:13). From the beginning of John’s preaching and continuing through the teaching of Jesus, the words of the New Testament were in the process of being delivered. John began preparing the way for Jesus and the New Testament era (Matthew 3:3; 11:10; Isaiah 40:3-4). The word's of the kingdom (regarding the New Testament church) did not start or begin to be given (delivered) in Acts two. They started with John but did not become effective (made law, ratified, probated) until Acts two and then continued with the inspired apostles and writers through the delivery of the rest of the New Testament. It’s also worth noting that even though the events recorded in the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John occurred before Acts Two, they were not actually written until after Act Two.
Jesus went about preaching “the gospel of the kingdom” (Matthew 4:23; 9:35; 24:13; Mark 1:14). What does that mean? What is “the gospel of the kingdom?” Jesus said he would build his church and give unto the apostles the keys of the kingdom (Matthew 16:18-19). The church and the kingdom are one and the same. Since the kingdom is the church and the church is the kingdom, Jesus was preaching the Gospel of the church. According to Acts 1:3, He was preaching things “pertaining to the kingdom of God” —the church of Christ. The Lord’s preaching (teaching) was concerning things that would be a part of the teaching of the New Testament. Does Luke 16:16 mean nothing? Are they just words taking up space?
If nothing recorded in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Acts 1 is a part of the New Testament, then we don’t have to listen to anything Jesus said. Isn’t it interesting that God anticipated such foolishness and recorded the account of Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration when he met with Moses and Elijah (Matthew 17:1-5)? Moses represented the Old Law, and Elijah represented the prophets — in other words, the entirety of the Old Testament. What did God tell Peter, James, and John and, by extension, the whole world to do regarding Moses, Elijah, and Jesus? “...This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him” (Matthew 17:5). What does God tell us to do concerning the Lord and his words? Hear him. But, if nothing He said is the doctrine of the New Testament (church), then we have a major dilemma between what man would have us believe and what God tells us to do. Will we believe in the teaching of men, or will we believe in the teaching of Jesus? In keeping with what Joshua said long ago (Joshua 24:15), “for me and my house,” we will accept the teaching of Jesus.
Hebrews 1:1-2 is very clear concerning the words of the Lord —the words he spoke while walking the earth. “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [his] Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds.” We must take these verses out of the Bible if Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are not a part of the New Testament.
These two verses tell us plainly that God has spoken to the whole world, this Christian Dispensation, through his only begotten Son, Jesus, the Christ.
John 12:48 is certain. If the New Testament does not start until Acts two, then why did Jesus say, “He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day” (John 12:48). Which is it? Either his words mean nothing, being spoken while living under the Old Testament and cannot be a part of the New Testament, OR they are a part of the New Testament because all men in the Christian Age will be judged by his words. I think I’ll believe and teach Jesus’ words. What about you?
No less than seven parables spoken by Jesus in Matthew 13 are specifically pertaining to the kingdom, the church. By these parables, the apostles were to know the mysteries of the church (Matthew 13:11) and the word of the church (Matthew 13:19). The kingdom/church would last until the end of the world (Matthew 13:40). This is not true of the Old Testament, but it is true of the church of Christ. These parables were the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies concerning the kingdom or church, such as Matthew 13:13 from Jeremiah 5:21, Matthew 13:14 from Isaiah 6:9, and Matthew 13:35 from Psalm 78:2. They teach the great value, treasure, and importance of the Lord’s church. We are to forfeit all that we have in this world to be a faithful member of the church (Matthew 13:44- 50; cf. Matthew 6:33). These parables apply to the Christian Age, not the Mosaic Age.
When did the words of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John (historically part of the New Testament) become effective? It was on the day of Pentecost when the church began (Acts 2). The Lord’s last will and testament was in the process of being given (delivered) in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John while he was on earth, but it would not become effective until preached on Pentecost in Acts 2.
Hebrews 9:15-17 tells us when the Lord’s words in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John — those things pertaining to the kingdom (Acts 1:3) —became effective. “And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, 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. For where a testament [is], there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament [is] of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.”
While we live, we can write our own “last will and testament.” As long as we live, we can change, modify, add, and take from it. While we are living, the stipulations of our will are null and void. It is only after our death that our will can be probated in a court of law. At that time, the executor(s) of our will has the power to administer the estate. This is exactly what we read in Hebrews 9. While the Lord was alive, he was speaking/teaching his will. That’s what we read in Luke 16:16. After his death, his will was preached. That’s what was done in Acts 2 and the rest of the New Testament. What’s so hard to understand about that? Men need help to misunderstand it, and there is plenty of this kind of help around!
Desperation
Those who believe and teach the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are a part of the Old Testament, and not a part of the New Testament often do so to avoid (dismiss) what Jesus said in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9. In these two passages, Jesus gives only one reason for a divorce and remarriage that meets God’s approval. Jesus said, “Whosoever shall put away his wife, except [it be] for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery” (Matthew 19:9). Why did Jesus talk about eunuchs in Matthew 19:12? What was the point? The point is that those who have an unscriptural divorce cannot marry again. They must live as a eunuch —not married. Going to heaven is far more im-portant than marriage. Those who are divorced, but did not divorce their spouse be-cause of their spouse’s fornication, have to make a choice: marriage or heaven, they can’t have both.
To remove the passages of Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 from the New Testament does not help their case whatsoever. Instead, if they’re looking to be able to divorce and remarry, it makes their situation even worse. If you remove these two verses, no passage from Acts 2 throughout the rest of the New Testament authorizes divorce and remarriage. Consequently, there is no authority whatsoever for one to divorce their spouse and enter another marriage. If one does so, they’re “living in adultery” and cannot be saved unless they repent and get out of the adulterous marriage in which they are living.
I’ve heard some say you can’t “live” in adultery and that committing adultery is simply a “one-time” event. You just repent of your divorce, and then you’re free to enter another marriage. However, they conveniently ignore the words of Matthew 5:32 and 19:9, where Jesus made clear that whoever enters another marriage “committeth adultery.” The verb tense is continuous action —you “keep on committing adultery” as long as you continue in that marriage. In Colossians 3:5-7, the Holy Spirit actually makes application of Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 by reminding some of the members of the church at Colosse that before they became Christians, they had “lived in” fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness. You can’t just wish or ignore these passages away!
An attempt to so desperately do away with Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 has left such individuals in dire straits with no Bible authority for divorcing and remarrying whatsoever. By the way, is what Jesus said in these verses so despised they must be dismissed, discredited, and disposed of? If so, then you’re left with absolutely no passage that authorizes a divorce and remarriage!
Conclusion
Romans 7:2-3 provides authority for another marriage, not because of divorce, but because of the death of your spouse. “For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to [her] husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of [her] husband. So then if, while [her] husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.”
“Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into [your] house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds” (II John 9-11). If all Jesus said belongs to the Old Testament era, then we need to inform the apostle John he missed it in these verses!
The way of the transgressor is hard! (Proverbs13:15)
