The Old Testament covenant with the Jews was nullified by the New Testament

CLAIM:

The Old Testament covenant with the Jews was nullified by the New Testament

STATUS:

False / Theologically Disputed / Misleading

KEY COUNTERPOINTS:

1. The Hebrew Bible repeatedly describes the covenant with Israel as enduring, not temporary.
   Genesis 17:7 calls the covenant with Abraham and his descendants an everlasting covenant. Leviticus 26:44 to 45 is even sharper: even when Israel is punished and exiled, God says He will not reject them, destroy them, or annul His covenant with them. That directly blocks the idea that later sin, exile, or theological disagreement means covenant cancellation.

2. Jeremiah’s “new covenant” is made with Israel and Judah, not with a group replacing them.
   Christians often cite Jeremiah 31 as a prophecy of the New Testament. But the text itself says the new covenant is made “with the House of Israel and the House of Judah.” The same chapter says Israel will cease to be a nation before God only if the fixed order of sun, moon, stars, and sea disappears. So Jeremiah cannot honestly be used as a simple “Israel was replaced” prooftext. In its original context, the new covenant is Israel’s restoration and internal renewal, not Israel’s deletion.

3. The New Testament itself says God did not reject the Jewish people.
   Romans 11 directly asks: “Has God rejected His people?” and answers: “By no means.” It later says that, regarding election, the Jewish people remain beloved for the sake of the patriarchs, because God’s gifts and calling are irrevocable. That creates a serious internal Christian problem for anyone claiming the New Testament simply nullified Israel’s covenant.

4. John roots salvation in the Jews, not in Jewish covenant erasure.
   John 4:22 says: “salvation is from the Jews.” That does not make John a Jewish text in the rabbinic sense, and it does not mean Christianity accepts Judaism as complete without Jesus. But it does mean the Christian story is rooted in Jewish covenant history, Jewish scripture, Jewish messianic expectation, and the Jewish people. A total cancellation model clashes with that.

5. “New covenant” does not automatically mean “old covenant with Israel no longer exists.”
   The word “new” can mean renewed, fulfilled, expanded, reinterpreted, or transformed depending on the theology being argued. It does not automatically mean erased. Christians may argue that Jesus fulfills covenant promises. But “fulfilled” and “nullified” are not the same claim. Nullification requires proof that God revoked Israel’s covenant, and both the Hebrew Bible and Romans 11 resist that claim.

6. Major modern Christian teaching rejects presenting Jews as rejected or cursed by God.
   Nostra Aetate 4 explicitly says Jews should not be presented as rejected or cursed by God. The Catholic Catechism also describes the Jewish faith as already a response to God’s revelation in the Old Covenant. That does not settle Jewish theology, but it proves that crude covenant cancellation is not the only Christian reading, and major Christian institutions have moved away from it.

EVIDENCE:

• Genesis 17:7 calls God’s covenant with Abraham and his descendants an everlasting covenant.

• Leviticus 26:44 to 45 says God will not reject Israel or annul His covenant, even when Israel is in exile among enemies.

• Jeremiah 31:31 says the new covenant is made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah.

• Jeremiah 31:35 to 37 says Israel remains a nation before God as long as the fixed order of creation stands.

• Isaiah 59:20 to 21 describes God’s covenant with Jacob and his descendants as continuing through generations.

• Romans 11:1 to 2 explicitly says God has not rejected His people.

• Romans 11:28 to 29 says Jewish election remains beloved and that God’s gifts and calling are irrevocable.

• John 4:22 says salvation is from the Jews.

• Nostra Aetate 4 says Jews should not be presented as rejected or cursed by God.

PRIMARY SOURCES:

Genesis 17:7, Sefaria
https://www.sefaria.org/Genesis.17.7
Primary Torah source describing the Abrahamic covenant as everlasting with Abraham’s descendants.

“I will establish My covenant between Me and you, and your offspring to come, as an everlasting covenant throughout the ages.”

Leviticus 26:44 to 45, Sefaria
https://www.sefaria.org/Leviticus.26.44-45
One of the strongest Torah sources against covenant nullification. It says punishment and exile do not annul God’s covenant with Israel.

“Yet, even then, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or spurn them so as to destroy them, annulling My covenant with them.”

Jeremiah 31:31 to 34, Sefaria
https://www.sefaria.org/Jeremiah.31.31-34
The “new covenant” passage itself. The key point is that the covenant is made with Israel and Judah, not with a people replacing Israel and Judah.

“I will make a new covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah.”

Jeremiah 31:35 to 37, Sefaria
https://www.sefaria.org/Jeremiah.31.35-37
Prophetic source tying Israel’s continued national status before God to the fixed order of creation.

“If these laws should ever be annulled by Me, declares the Lord, only then would the offspring of Israel cease to be a nation before Me for all time.”

Isaiah 59:20 to 21, Sefaria
https://www.sefaria.org/Isaiah.59.20-21
Prophetic covenant continuity text. It describes God’s words and spirit remaining with Jacob’s descendants across generations.

“My spirit which is upon you, and My words which I have placed in your mouth, shall not depart from your mouth, nor from the mouth of your children.”

Romans 11:1 to 2, BibleGateway
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2011%3A1-2&version=NRSVUE
New Testament source directly denying that God rejected His people.

“I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means!”

Romans 11:28 to 29, BibleGateway
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2011%3A28-29&version=NRSVUE
One of the strongest New Testament passages against crude replacement theology. It says Jewish election remains beloved and irrevocable.

“As regards election they are beloved, for the sake of their ancestors; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.”

John 4:22, BibleGateway
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%204%3A22&version=NRSVUE
New Testament source where Jesus roots salvation in the Jewish people, not in their erasure.

“You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews.”

Hebrews 8:13, BibleGateway
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%208%3A13&version=NRSVUE
Important Christian prooftext often used for the nullification claim. It should be known and answered directly.

“In speaking of a new covenant, he has made the first one obsolete.”

Nostra Aetate 4, Vatican
https://www.christianunity.va/content/unitacristiani/en/commissione-per-i-rapporti-religiosi-con-l-ebraismo/nostra-aetate-n—4/en.html
Major Catholic teaching rejecting the idea that Jews should be presented as rejected or cursed by God.

“The Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God.”

STRONGEST COUNTER ARGUMENTS WORTH KNOWING:

• Hebrews 8:13 says the old covenant is obsolete.
This is the strongest New Testament prooftext for the opposing side. The response is that Hebrews is making a Christian theological argument about priesthood, sacrifice, and covenant mediation through Jesus. It does not erase the Hebrew Bible’s own repeated statements that God’s covenant with Israel is everlasting, nor does it cancel Romans 11’s claim that God has not rejected His people.

• Christians may argue that Jeremiah 31 predicts the Christian New Testament.
Correct. That is a major Christian reading. But Jeremiah says the new covenant is with Israel and Judah. It does not say God replaces Israel with gentile Christians. The text is about covenant renewal, Torah internalized, and Israel restored.

• Paul says believers in Christ are included in God’s promises.
Correct. But inclusion of gentiles is not the same as rejection of Jews. Romans 11’s olive tree image warns gentile believers not to boast over Israel. That image is grafting in, not Israel’s covenant being deleted.

• Some New Testament texts are hostile toward Jewish opponents of Jesus.
Correct. The New Testament contains polemical passages. That creates real interpretive and historical problems. But polemic against certain opponents, or even Christian claims about fulfillment, does not prove total covenant nullification.

• Christian theology often teaches that Jesus fulfills the law.
Correct. The issue is the leap from “fulfills” to “nullifies the Jewish covenant.” Those are different claims. Fulfillment theology can be argued without claiming Jews are abandoned, cursed, or no longer covenantally significant.

NOTES:

Effective framing

The weak response is: “No, the covenant is still valid.”
That is true from a Jewish standpoint, but it does not answer the Christian prooftexts.

The stronger response is: “The Hebrew Bible calls the covenant everlasting and says even exile does not annul it. Jeremiah’s new covenant is made with Israel and Judah, not with their replacement. And even Romans 11 says God has not rejected His people because His gifts and calling are irrevocable.”

The key pivot

The misleading pivot is nullified.

“New covenant” does not automatically mean “old covenant with Israel was erased.” The opponent must prove cancellation, not merely change, fulfillment, or expansion. That proof runs straight into Leviticus 26, Jeremiah 31, Romans 11, and John 4.

Burden of proof

The burden should be pushed back:

• Where does the Hebrew Bible say the covenant with Israel expires?
• How does nullification survive Leviticus 26:44 to 45?
• Why does Jeremiah’s new covenant name Israel and Judah if Israel is supposedly replaced?
• How can the covenant be nullified if Romans says God’s gifts and calling are irrevocable?
• Why should Hebrews 8 be allowed to override Romans 11 without qualification?

Best one line rebuttal

The Hebrew Bible calls Israel’s covenant everlasting, Leviticus says exile does not annul it, Jeremiah’s new covenant is made with Israel and Judah, and Romans 11 says God has not rejected His people because His gifts and calling are irrevocable, so “new covenant” does not prove Jewish covenant nullification.

see more:

Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, St Michael’s Depot.pdf
The New Testament, World English Bible.pdf

RELATED CLAIMS:

• Christianity replaced Judaism, so Jews are no longer God’s chosen people
• God rejected the Jewish people after they rejected Jesus
• The New Testament is inherently antisemitic
• The Jews were responsible for the death of Jesus
• Rabbinical Judaism is not the same religion as Biblical Judaism, modern Jews practice a man-made replacement