What Is the Relationship of the Old Testament and New Testament?
The Bible is one book composed of two Testaments, yet the relationship between the Old Testament (OT) and the New Testament (NT) has been debated throughout church history. Hebrews opens with this reminder: “Long ago God spoke to our ancestors in many and various ways by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son” (Hebrews 1:1–2). That single sentence raises the entire issue: how does the word of Christ relate to the word of the prophets?
Some argue the OT and NT stand apart, each able to speak independently. Others emphasize unity, seeing the OT as promise and the NT as fulfillment. Still others caution against fusing them too closely. Yet if all Scripture is inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16), then the relationship of the Testaments is central to hearing God’s word today.
This article surveys the history of the discussion and outlines the key theological themes involved in the relationship between the Testaments.
1. Nature of the Problem
The central question is whether the NT continues the OT or stands apart from it. Scholars such as H. G. Reventlow and N. H. Ridderbos considered this the very heart of biblical theology, since all theology depends on how we hold the two together. The challenge emerges in several ways:
Use of the OT in the NT: Jesus and the apostles consistently quoted and applied OT texts.
History of Christian interpretation: debates over allegory, typology, and literal readings shaped doctrine.
Application to Christian life: believers must know whether the OT is still authoritative for faith and practice.
If the Testaments are separated too sharply, the OT risks being marginalized. If they are fused carelessly, the distinctive voice of each risks being lost.
2. Unity and Diversity Across History
Throughout history, interpreters have wrestled with how the two Testaments fit together. The issue reflects the broader philosophical tension of unity and diversity. Just as the doctrine of the Trinity maintains that God is both one and three, the relationship of the Testaments requires a both–and, not an either–or, solution.
Early church debates: Marcion rejected the OT entirely, while others overused allegory to spiritualize Israel’s history. In contrast, the Antiochene school emphasized historical meaning and typology.
Medieval developments: allegory often overshadowed history, raising questions about how OT saints were saved before the church and its sacraments.
Reformation recovery: Luther and Calvin reemphasized the historical and Christological nature of the OT. Luther saw both law and gospel in both Testaments, though he emphasized law in the OT and grace in the NT. Calvin stressed covenant continuity, showing that the Redeemer revealed under the law is the same revealed in the gospel.
These examples reveal that the tension between unity and diversity has never disappeared. The challenge is not solved by erasing one pole but by holding both in Christ.
3. Dimensions of Scripture
The relationship of the Testaments can also be studied through the Bible’s dimensions:
Literary: The OT is primarily written in Hebrew (with Aramaic portions), while the NT is in Greek. New genres such as Gospels and epistles appear, yet they share narrative, wisdom, prophecy, and apocalyptic forms.
Historical: Jesus and the apostles were Jews, deeply rooted in Israel’s history. Yet the NT shows God’s promises extending to the nations, fulfilling OT expectations (Isaiah 49:6).
Theological: The NT writers insist on continuity with the OT, affirming that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is the God and Father of Jesus Christ (Acts 3:13). At the same time, they interpret the OT in light of Christ, showing both continuity and transformation.
4. Canonical and Theological Status
Four main approaches have emerged regarding the canonical status of the Testaments:
OT priority: Some theologians, such as A. A. van Ruler, argued that the OT expresses the kingdom of God more fully than the NT, treating the NT as a mere glossary. This view, however, downplays Christ’s centrality.
NT priority: Marcion and later thinkers subordinated or rejected the OT. Modern forms appear whenever the OT is ignored in preaching and discipleship. Rudolf Bultmann went further, treating the OT mainly as presupposition, emphasizing discontinuity between law and gospel.
Equal status: Others, like Wilhelm Vischer, stress complementarity: the OT tells us what Christ is, the NT tells us who he is. In this view, both are Christian Scripture, but the NT clarifies and fulfills the OT.
Promise and fulfillment: The most balanced approach sees both as necessary. The OT cannot be fully grasped without its fulfillment in the NT, and the NT cannot be understood without the promises of the OT.
5. Thematic Polarities
Several theological polarities frame the discussion of the Testaments’ relationship:
Salvation-history and eschatology: The OT begins the story of God’s saving acts; the NT shows their goal in Christ’s death and resurrection and points to their consummation in the new creation.
Type and antitype: Events such as the exodus foreshadow greater redemption in Christ (1 Corinthians 10:1–4).
Promise and fulfillment: Abraham’s covenant promise finds its ultimate fulfillment in Christ (Galatians 3:16).
Old covenant and new covenant: The law given at Sinai prepared for the new covenant in Christ’s blood (Jeremiah 31:31–34; Luke 22:20).
Law and gospel: Both Testaments contain elements of law and promise, but in Christ grace abounds over judgment.
Israel and the church: The church is the continuation of God’s people, composed of believing Jews and Gentiles grafted into the same covenant family (Romans 11:17–24).
Each polarity reflects the mystery of continuity and discontinuity that is resolved only in Christ.
6. Christological Center
At the heart of the relationship between the Testaments stands Jesus Christ. He declared, “These are the Scriptures that testify about me” (John 5:39). The apostles likewise proclaimed that the OT’s story finds its climax in him.
Peter at Pentecost explained Joel and the Psalms as fulfilled in Jesus’ death and resurrection (Acts 2:16–36).
Paul in Pisidian Antioch declared that God fulfilled the promise to the fathers by raising Jesus from the dead (Acts 13:32–33).
The author of Hebrews showed that OT sacrifices, priests, and covenants were shadows pointing to Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice (Hebrews 9:23–28).
Christ unites the Testaments because he is both the goal of Israel’s history and the Lord of the church.
7. Implications for the Church
Understanding the relationship of the Testaments shapes the church’s preaching, teaching, and mission. If we neglect the OT, we lose the foundation of God’s promises. If we neglect the NT, we miss the fulfillment in Christ. Together, they testify to one Gospel: salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
This relationship also points us forward to the end of history. Just as the OT anticipated Christ’s first coming, the NT anticipates his return. The unity of the Testaments teaches us to live between promise and fulfillment, awaiting the day when God’s kingdom is fully revealed.
Conclusion
The relationship of the OT and NT cannot be reduced to a simple formula. They are distinct yet united, diverse yet one. The OT provides promise, type, and foundation; the NT provides fulfillment, antitype, and consummation. Both reveal the one God and the one Gospel, culminating in Jesus Christ.
To read the Bible faithfully, the church must hold together the Testaments in light of Christ, who is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8).
