I often enjoy small controversies that don’t have any real significance, because there is no pressure to be right. So I enjoyed a discussion between a radio talk-show host and one of his callers over what we should call the year. Is it "Two Thousand and One," or should it be "Twenty-O-One." You know, it really doesn’t matter. People will call the year what they get used to calling it, and there is no known urgency to be consistent with the fact that 1901 was not referred to as "One Thousand Nine Hundred and One," but "Nineteen-O-One." Thankfully, I will be long dead before the ease of saying the year will become critically from a linguistic viewpoint. In the meantime, it’s kind of fun to argue in a friendly sort of way about it.

At the same time, there are mistakes that are clearly made that are not any more important, but nevertheless get under my skin. For instance, the History Channel was carrying, as late as last week, a program called "Our Century" which deals more with World War II than any other subject. Is the implication as it sounds, that my century is passed, and what is now does not pertain to me?

Another fellow on a news program was talking about how the war in Afghanistan was unlike any other war fought in this century. DUH! It is the ONLY war fought by us in this century!

Question: How many World Series have the Yankees won in this century? The answer is, they have won NONE. The only team to have won a World Series in this century is the Arizona Diamondbacks. Monday will conclude the first year of this century. Tuesday will begin the 2^nd. We are in a New Century, and many people don’t even know it.

We are also in a new spiritual era. We are under the New Covenant of the Messiah of God, Jesus Christ. I know that we have been under that covenant for nearly 2,000 years, but there are some who do not realize it.

In 2 Corinthians 3, the apostle Paul identifies himself and the others as "ministers of a new covenant." The superiority of the new over the old covenant is spelled out in the description that Paul gives of both. The new covenant is written in hearts of flesh, of the spirit, giveth life, a ministration of the spirit with grace, a ministration of righteousness which exceeds the other in glory, and which remains, or abides. The old is described this way: written on stone tablets, that killeth, a ministration of condemnation, of lesser glory, that passes away (2 Cor. 3:6-11).

It was the superior nature of the New Covenant that gave Paul "boldness of speech" (vs. 12).

He had been a zealous proponent of the Old, and never did he say that it was evil. It was, rather, the means by which God prepared humanity for the provisions of the New.

Paul’s great desire in his life was that his brethren in the flesh could see the passing of the Old Covenant and the establishing of God’s righteousness in the new. He wrote to the Romans, "I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience bearing witness with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and unceasing pain in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were anathema from Christ for my brethren's sake, my kinsmen according to the flesh" (Rom. 9:1-3). Then later he wrote, "Brethren, my heart's desire and my supplication to God is for them, that they may be saved. For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. For being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God" (Rom. 10:1-3). Paul wanted more than anything the salvation of his kinsmen in the flesh. But salvation comes only through Jesus. "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me" (John 14:6). "And in none other is there salvation: for neither is there any other name under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).

Paul, a lover of God, was always zealous for what he thought was right (Acts 23:1). But he was wrong about Jesus and the passing of the Law of Moses. There were so many that he loved so much who never did see the passing of the old era. Not only the law, but the society that it spawned was on the verge of passing away. "In that he saith, A new covenant he hath made the first old. But that which is becoming old and waxeth aged is nigh unto vanishing away" (Heb. 8:13).

Why could they not see it? What stood between them and an understanding that the Old Testament Law was taken out of the way by God. Paul speaks in 2 Corinthians 3 of Moses who, when he descended from God’s presence in the Mount, "put a veil upon his face, that the children of Israel should not look stedfastly on the end of that which was passing away:

but their minds were hardened: for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remaineth, it not being revealed to them that it is done away in Christ" (vs. 13-14). The lack of revelation concerning the passing of the Old Covenant was not the result of no information being offered in that covenant. Jeremiah 31:31-34 speaks of a new covenant, which was not like the covenant given on Sinai. And there are many other Old Testament passages that they were familiar with that made it clear a new covenant would replace the old.

"But unto this day, whensoever Moses is read, a veil lieth upon their heart" (2 Cor. 3:15). The veil that lay on their heart was, perhaps, their prejudice against that which was new, perhaps, their attachment to the old ways. Maybe it was the love of power that the old system had vested in them. Whatever it was may have been different for each one, but it kept them from seeing the truth, and kept them away from God. "But whensoever it shall turn to the Lord, the veil is taken away" (vs. 16). Paul’s point is that when one has truly made up his mind to follow God’s will, no matter what the cost, he will be able to see that the Old Covenant Law is done away, the veil is gone.

There are many today whose hearts are veiled so that they cannot see the truth. There are many wonderful people in the denominations, many wonderful people in the Jewish faith, who live in ignorance concerning the passing of the Old Law. Our hearts desire is that they might come to know Jesus and be saved by his blood. But under the Old Law, this will never happen.

The other day I was watching Bill O’Leary skewer Jerry Falwell on this point. Falwell is the great apologizer. He makes perfectly sensible statements that can be backed up by scripture, then spends the next few days apologizing for what he said. O’Leary, a Catholic, asked Falwell if he thought that there were not good people in all faiths who were going to heaven. Falwell answered well by quoting John 14:6 (see above), and saying that tolerance of one’s person is not acceptance of his views. He is right about that. To say that the Jew and Moslem is lost and bound for hell if he does not repent and follow the teachings of Jesus is not to say that Jews or Moslems are not fit for society or should be persecuted or excluded in any way. God knows the intrinsic value of every man, and so should we.

But love demands that we not string along with them in their error, but lovingly and firmly show them to the Savior, theirs and ours, Jesus Christ.