480 TRANSLATION, NOTES, AND COMMENTShaer. iv 15.2), a designation found already in 2 Cor 3:14, where Paul alludes
to the reading of the "Old Covenant" in the synagogue.
The internal threat to the Church was heresy, above all Gnosticism, which
peaked in the mid-second century. The most serious aberration of Christian
thought to have an impact on covenant understanding came from Marcion
(A.D. 100-160), a Gnostic in the minds of some, but for others one who merely
had affinities with Gnosticism. Marcion wanted to cut off Christianity from
Judaism-completely and for all time. Against Marcion, and others such as
Valentinus, who was a true Gnostic, the Fathers fought to preserve Christian-
ity's Jewish roots, arguing that the God of the NT was not distinct from the God
of the OT, that the Holy Spirit in the NT was the same Holy Spirit at work in
the OT, and that NT Scripture itself was inextricably bound to OT Scripture-
indeed, it was a fulfillment of it. Gnostics minimized the historical founda-
tions of Christianity, being more concerned with creation than with covenant,
which perhaps explains the noticeable absence of discussion about the cove-
nant in Gnostic treatises, including the texts now available from Nag Ham-
madi. In a rare quotation of the words of Institution for the wine in Pistis
Sophia (iv 141), the wine and/or blood-along with fire and water-are mys-
teries possessing the ability to purify from sin (C. Schmidt 1978: 366-69).
The Fathers explained the rejection of the Jews by citing the "calf inci-
dent" in the Wilderness, at which time the Mosaic covenant was promulgated
(Ep. Barn. 4; 14; Irenaeus haer. iv 15.2; Tertullian, adv. Jud. 3; cf. Exodus 32).
Origen (contra Cels. ii 74-75) typed the Jews on the basis of this incident; i.e.,
the incident explained how it happened that the Jews rejected Jesus.
The Epistle of Barnabas does not mention the new covenant but, rather,
"the new law of our Lord Jesus Christ;' which contrasts with the older law of
sacrifice in that it is "without the yoke of necessity" (Ep. Barn. 2). The Chris-
tian has forgiveness from sins through Jesus' blood (chap. 5). For Barnabas
there was only one covenant, received by Moses, but immediately lost due to
the sin of the calf. In reality, Israel never had a covenant with God. Christians
are heirs to this one covenant through Christ, in whom it is sealed upon their
hearts. Barnabas thus argues that one covenant cannot belong to both Jews and
Christians (Ep. Barn. 4; 13-14; cf. Bultmann 1951: 98, 110-11). Promises of a
future covenant cited from the OT are Ezek 11:19; 36:26 (chap. 6); and Isa
42:6-7 (chap. 14).
Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew recognizes two laws or
covenants (dial. 10-12, 67, 118, 122-23). The old through Moses has been ab-
rogated and remains only for the Jews, although Justin asks rhetorically if
even this is so, since the Jews do not believe their own Scriptures dial. 29).
The new law and covenant through Christ in any case replaces the old; it does
not require circumcision along with lesser observances, and it is final, eter-
nal, and universal in scope (dial. 11). Jeremiah 31:31-32 and Isa 51:4-5 point
to Christ as the new law and covenant, also to Christians, who are the true
spiritual Israel (dial. 11; cf. 123). Isaiah 42:6-7 likewise points to Christ, and
its promise of a covenant that will be a "light to the nations" finds fulfillment