Q&A: New found Christian. Need help on Biblical Article?

Question by Joey: New found Christian. Need help on Biblical Article?
Well im giving a powerpoint presentation to my class next friday, and i wanna talk about a portion of this article about the new covenant as contrasted to the old. How would i break it up into like 4 or 5 slides? and what should i talk about?
i need to be able to talk for 8 minutes and i really wanna do this section. I wish i was a bit smarter, so thanks for the help
God Bless 🙂

so if you can help me heres the article.Thanks 😀 take care

The New Covenant as Contrasted to the Old
A better reading seems to be, therefore, that the term gra&mma and the
characteristics killing and condemnation are employed here to characterize the Mosaic covenant as such, a covenant that is now obsolete.15 This interpretation conforms with v. 10 where it is said that the old covenant has had glory, but now, on account of the surpassing glory of the new, does not have any glory.16 If the new covenant is defined as giving the ability to obey the law of the old, we would expect Paul to say that the old covenant has now reached its full glory.
Apart from 2 Cor. 3, Paul uses the phrase ‘new covenant’ only in
1 Cor. 11.25, where it refers to the covenant inaugurated by Jesus at his
death.17 The designation ‘old covenant’ is only used here in Paul.18 The
explicit contrasting of two covenants is found in one other instance,
however, viz. Gal. 4.21-31.19 The contrast in this passage is between
the Sinaitic covenant and the Abrahamic covenant, renewed in Christ.
In v. 24 the act of ‘bearing children for slavery’ is predicated of the
Sinaitic covenant. Gal. 4.21-31 is therefore another instance where the
new covenant is not seen merely as an added quality to the old but as a
covenant with an opposite function: producing freedom versus slavery.
A possible parallel to the gra&mma of 2 Cor. 3, though often disregarded, is the ‘handwriting’, xeiro&grafon, of Col. 2.14.20 In the immetion of the two glories’ (‘Who Is Sufficient’, p. 73).
diate context the contrast with the old covenant (by means of its sign,
circumcision, v. 11) is prominent, as is the emphasis on the life-giving
power of Christ (vv. 12b, 13b).21 The meaning of xeiro&grafon maintained by most is ‘note of indebtedness’.22 The word is richly attested in the papyri, and this evidence shows that, even though xeiro&grafon is commonly used for a note of indebtedness, this is not invariably so. It is also used for a sales contract,23 for a receipt for a deposit,24 for a work contract,25 for a transfer of labor force,26 and for a steward’s authorization.27 These examples clearly show that ‘note of indebtedness’ should not be understood as the meaning of the term. Rather, it is a common use, among many others. The term simply means ‘handwriting’, something the author has written himself, the idea being
some what similar to our ‘legally binding signature’, by which the
writer legally binds himself or herself to what is stated above or below.
In this capacity xeiro&grafon is naturally used for a note of indebtedness, as well as for a number of other things.28
Acknowledging that the primary idea conveyed by the word xeiro&-
grafon is something the author has written himself, it is difficult to
maintain the interpretation ‘note of indebtedness’ in Col. 2.14. There is
no evidence that Paul can be thinking of a note of indebtedness signed
by humanity.29 Several interpreters have understood Col. 2.14 against
the background of the Jewish tradition of records that are kept in
heaven regarding the good and evil deeds of human beings.30 In the
Pseudepigrapha the word xeiro&grafon is used to refer to these documents (Apoc. Zeph. 3.6-9).31 Understanding the term against this background, however, makes the function of the succeeding toi=j do&gmasin enigmatic.32 The possibility that the dative do&gmasin identifies the xeiro&grafon as the tablets with the Ten Commandments should not be excluded.33 As these tablets are said to have been written with the finger of God (Exod. 31.18; Deut. 9.10), this interpretation is in keeping with the general meaning of the word. If this is correct, it would be a parallel to 2 Cor. 3 as interpreted here, a contrast between the old and new cove-nants being intended; the death of Christ abrogates the old covenant and inaugurates the new. The Christ event affected the old covenant law, not only the ethical competence of believers.
The statement that the letter kills is not derived directly from the
Exodus narrative, upon which Paul’s argument here is based. The shorthand manner of his introducing this characteristic of the gra&mma leads us naturally to assume that Paul has elaborated on this theme in his oral teaching in Corinth. We have to resort to his teaching on these matters in Gal. 3 and Rom. 7 to understand Paul’s thinking on this matter.34 The understanding of the contrast between the old and the new covenant proposed in this article is in line with Paul’s argument elsewhere. The old covenant had the character of a command (R

Best answer:

Answer by Jeni824
tl;dr . My advice is shorten it up a bit if you want anyone to pay attention….especially if its a powerpoint.

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!