Most Bible students are well aware of the two covenants that comprise the Bible. (Gal. 4:21-31.) There are no others as far as the Bible is concerned. The Scriptures do not indicate that there will ever be another covenant in addition to these two. In fact, it excludes the possibility of any other. The old and new covenants are strongly linked together; they are, in fact, inseparable. One is incomplete without the other. They belong to one another just as childhood and adulthood are connected.

"Who (God) also hath made us able ministers of the New Testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit, for the letter killeth, but the spirit gives life." (2 Cor. 3:6.)

"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 out of the land of Egypt, which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord. 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 I will be their God and they shall be my people." (Jeremiah 31:31-33.)

"And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel. . . and they all shall have one Shepherd. Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them. . . I will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore. My tabernacle also shall be with them; yea, I will be their God and they shall be my people." (Ezekiel 37:21-28.)

"But now hath he (the Son) obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant which was established upon better promises. For if that covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel. . . ." (Hebrews 8:6-8.)

We should always remember that two things accompany the covenants of God. They are a priesthood and blood to sanctify the covenant. If someone claims to have some covenant from God, then two questions immediately arise. What priesthood do you have? What kind of blood covers the covenant?

Blood. "For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of a testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead; otherwise, it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats with water and scarlet wool and hyssop and sprinkled both the book and all the people saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle and all the vessels of the ministry. And almost all things are by the law purged with blood, and without shedding of blood is no remission. It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these." (Hebrews 9:16-23.)

The better sacrifice to which the writer referred is the sacrifice of Jesus and his blood. Jesus said, when instituting the Lord’s Supper, "For this is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins." (Matthew 26:28.)

"Now the God of peace that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant." (Heb. 13:20.)

Priesthood. The summary of this discussion is found in Hebrews 7. We know that the Levitical priesthood and the first covenant belong together; the second covenant and the priesthood of Melchisedek go together.

"If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. . . Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedek." (Hebrews 7:11-17.)

Priests were necessary to carry out the sacrificial aspects of the Law, to assist the people in what was proper to offer to God, to intercede for the people, and to stand between man and God. The priesthood and the covenant stood together.

Jesus was from a different tribe than the Jewish priests. They were from Levi; He was from Judah. His priesthood was after the likeness of Melchisedek, not after the Levitical. The point that the Hebrew writer made is that the priesthood of Melchisedek is greater than the Levitical priesthood, because Abraham paid tithes to Melchisedek.

There are several bridges between the first and second covenants of the Bible. We should not think that they stand so far apart that there is no continuity or abiding relationship between them. It is true that we are not under the Law of Moses today, but there is so much more to say about the inseparable nature of these two covenants. Consider the following:

understand the new covenant today without having the first covenant. The Old Testament is the New concealed; the New is the Old revealed. Genesis begins with the story of man losing his paradise home; Revelations ends with believers in Christ gaining his paradise again. The unity and harmony between the Law and the Gospel is impressive. The more one reads and understands the Bible the more one sees the glory of God and his will expressed in this one message.

The promise to Abraham included both covenants. (Genesis 12:1f.) God intended from the beginning to send his Son into the world to save mankind. He wanted to bless all nations, not just the Jewish nation. Abraham received the promises of God five hundred years before the Law was given. He was not a "Jew." He is the "father of all who believe."

Christians establish the law through faith; we do not make the Law void. (Romans 3:31.) Christians fulfill the law through love. "Owe no man anything, but to love one another; for he that loves another hath fulfilled the law." (Romans 13:8.)

Jesus came to fulfill the Law. "Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets; I am not come to destroy but to fulfill." (Matt. 5:17.) "For Christ is the end (goal or purpose) of the law for righteousness to everyone that believes." (Romans 10:4.)

The new covenant completes or fulfills what was begun under the old. The plan of God is now revealed. There is so much more to be said about the two covenants. We should avoid over simplifications in speaking about the Law of God. Paul wrote "the law is holy; the commandment holy, just and good." (Rom. 7:12.) David extolled the virtues of the law of God. (Psalm 19.)

One way to illustrate the inseparable relationship between the Law and the Gospel is to understand the efforts of some to add to this story or to take away from it. Three times the Bible says that no one should try to do this, but some do so anyway. (Deut. 4:2, Prov. 30:5-6, Rev. 22:18-19.)

The Muslim Effort. Several religious bodies claim the Old Testament as the foundation for their faith. Among them are the Jews, Muslims and Christians. The Jews denied the place for the second covenant, even though their own writings foretold that a new covenant would be given. (Jeremiah 31:31.) The Hebrew writer confirmed that the covenant established by Jesus’ blood was that new covenant. (Heb. 8.)

Muslims claim that Mohammed is the last and greatest of the prophets of God. (The six greatest prophets, though there are others, were Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed. Muslims have prophets everywhere in history. Some claim that there were as many as 144,000! Even Alexander the Great is counted as one.) The repeated creed among Muslims daily is "The Lord God is one God and Mohammed is the prophet of God." Moses referred to a coming Prophet. (Deut. 18:15-19.) Everyone would be required to hear the voice of this prophet. If not, that person would be cut off from among the people. Peter applied this reference to Jesus Christ. (Acts 3:18-26.) Mohammed admitted to being a sinner like everyone else; the New Testament affirms the sinlessness of Jesus Christ. Muslims deny this claim about Jesus. How could a sinner prophet be greater than Jesus the Son of God? Where is the indisputable reference in the Old Covenant to the coming prophet Mohammed? Where is his name or full description of him in the Law or the prophets? Ezekiel said that one like David would rule over the united tribes of Israel under the new covenant. (Ezek. 37:24.)

Some powerful questions to ask Muslims are the following: What is the blood that sanctifies the Koran? What priesthood serves the people under the Koran before God? Is that priesthood better than the Levitical priesthood? And who is the Savior of the Muslims? The answers are they have no Savior, there is no blood that sanctifies the Koran, and they have no priesthood. They have Mohammed alone as the claimed prophet of God, who is by his own admission a sinner. He is also now dead and in a tomb. Muslims chose Ishmael, a son of Abraham by the flesh; God chose Isaac, the son of promise.

According to Islam, there are four inspired books of Scripture, which God revealed to man. They are the Law of Moses, the Psalms of David, the Gospel of Jesus, and the Koran. Whenever the first of these disagree with the Koran, Muslims claim some corruption of the text and that the Koran is right. There are no errors or corruption in the Koran, according to Muslims.

The Mormon Effort. This religious body has another testament, which they claim to be "Another Testament of Jesus Christ." The first edition of this second testament of Jesus was given to the followers of Joseph Smith in 1830! This is 1800 years after the life of Jesus Christ. Why did he wait so long to give this latter day testament? Was the first one incomplete or faulty in any way?

There are many questions that flood our minds when considering a claim by the Mormons that there is another testament. But remember these two especially---What blood sanctifies it? And what is the priesthood that executes it?

Blood for atonement. The Book of Mormon teaches that some should be put to death immediately for their sins (like stealing, murder, adultery, etc.). In dying and shedding their blood, this atones for the sins that they have committed. There are some sins that Jesus blood alone will not atone. They claim that the violent death of their leader, Joseph Smith, in a Carthage, Illinois jail will atone for some of their sins. Such is blasphemous!

Priesthood. What priests execute this second testament? They claim that John the Baptist conferred the priesthood of Melchisedek was conferred upon Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery. Later, he wrote that Peter, James and John appeared to them and restored the priesthood of Melchisedek. Again, the claim is that this priesthood was conferred for the first time upon several of the elders. Well, someone is supposed to have it!

Even Jesus could not be a high priest on earth because the only one given to be practiced on earth was the Levitical priesthood. Therefore, no other priesthood can be established on earth. (Heb. 8:4.)

If you made another will, it would invalidate the first one. A will comes into effect when one dies. Why did the second testament of Jesus Christ come into effect 1800 years after he died? Did he say before his death that he would be giving two wills? Mormons need to answer these questions. In recent weeks, Mormon leaders have been trying to polish up their public image. They are trying to erase the word, Mormon, and project an image that is closer to mainstream Christianity. They want to be called Christians. But as long as they have another testament, they cannot be considered in the mainstream of Christian thought.

Paul did not know anything about The Book of Mormon. Was he saved? Did he preach a complete Gospel? He did not if the claims of modern Mormons are true. This is what Paul wrote,

"But though we or an angel (this is interesting because Mormons claim that an angel, Moroni, revealed information from God to Joseph Smith), from heaven preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." (Gal. 1:8-9.)

Mormons claim that Moroni told Joseph Smith where these lost plates were and that they contain "the fulness of the everlasting Gospel." Mormons claim to follow the Old and New Covenants insomuch that they are translated properly. If there are any conflicts, the Book of Mormon should be followed. This book is claimed to be the most the most accurate book on earth, yet it has had over 3,000 changes made to it since 1830!

The Book of Mormon denies that the Bible is complete. Note these quotations:

"Yea, woe be unto him that saith, We have received and we need no more! And in fine, woe unto all those who tremble and are angry because of the truth of God! For behold, he that is built upon the rock receiveth it with gladness and he that is built upon a sandy foundation trembleth lest he shall fall. Woe be unto him that shall say, We have received the Word of God and we need no more of the Word of God, for we have enough!" (2 Nephi 28:27-29.)

"And because of my words shall his forth---many of the Gentiles shall say, A Bible! A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible." (2 Nephi 29:3.)

Mormons misuse and misinterpret Ezekiel 37:15-28. The two sticks, Judah and Ephraim, are the two parts of the nation of Israel. The prophet is telling of a time when unity will prevail under one Shepherd, which is Christ. Mormons say the two sticks represent the Bible from Judah and the Book of Mormon from the Gentiles. There is no indication that two books are under consideration here, but rather two parts of a nation being brought back into one.