The Reformed Olive Press

Why the Apostles Still Practiced Old Covenant Observances After the Cross: Understanding the Transition Period  Many are surprised to learn that long after Jesus’ crucifixion, His followers—including the Apostle Paul—were still participating in old covenant rituals: going to the temple, observing Jewish festivals, taking Nazarite vows, and even circumcising converts. At first glance, this seems contradictory. Wasn’t the old covenant fulfilled at the cross? Why were they still participating in it? The answer lies in the transitional period between the cross (c. 30 AD) and the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. The Age of Overlap: Two Covenants in Tension From the resurrection to the destruction of Jerusalem, two ages were overlapping: the old covenant age, which was fading away (Hebrews 8:13), and the new covenant age, which was breaking in with power (2 Corinthians 3). The apostles, especially Paul, lived in that unique window of time—what we might call the “overlap of the ages.” ...

 A New Garden of Eden in Bethlehem: Ruth and Boaz as Adam and Eve The story of Ruth begins in the shadow of death. Death stalks the land—famine in Bethlehem, the “House of Bread.” Death stalks the womb—three women, three husbands gone, and no children to carry on the name. Naomi is emptied of life and hope, echoing Eve's exile from the garden. But from this desolation, a new creation begins to grow. The story of Ruth and Boaz is more than a romantic tale—it's an Eden retold, a Genesis reimagined. It's the first Adam and Eve seen again through the humble harvest fields of redemption. Death in the Land and the Womb The opening of Ruth is steeped in Genesis-like tragedy. The land is cursed by famine, just as the ground was cursed in Genesis 3. Naomi, like Eve, loses the fruit of her womb and feels alienated from God: “The hand of the LORD has gone out against me” (Ruth 1:13). She renames herself Mara—bitterness. Hope is buried with her sons. But even in exile, seeds are being ...

Did God Contradict Himself? Harmonizing Egyptian Firstborn Deaths with Ezekiel 18:23 One of the hardest tensions in Scripture is this: In Exodus, God strikes down the Egyptian firstborn—including children—in judgment. But in Ezekiel 18:23, God says He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked, and explicitly says children will not die for their parents’ sins. So how do we make sense of this? Did God change? Was He contradicting Himself? Or is there a deeper, covenantal and relational logic at work? To answer this, we must leave behind rigid, static theology and enter the world of open theism, divine regret, and relational justice. 1. Ezekiel 18: God’s Covenant Justice and Moral Clarity "The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father… Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Lord God, and not rather that he should turn from his way and live?" (Ezekiel 18:20, 23) This is a clear rejection of intergenerational guilt as a moral pr...

From Local to Global: Why the Bible Starts with a Garden and Ends with a City The Bible doesn’t begin with a religious system, a temple, or a chosen nation. It begins with a garden —and with humanity, made in God's image, charged with a universal mission. This beginning isn’t incidental. It reveals the heart of God: to take something local and expand it until it touches the whole world. Genesis and Revelation, the bookends of the Bible, both tell this story. It’s a movement from the particular to the universal—from a small, sacred space to a cosmic restoration. The Mission Begins in the Garden Genesis 1 tells us that God created mankind—male and female—in His image, blessing them to: “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it…” (Genesis 1:28) This is a creation mandate , not a covenantal one. Adam and Eve are created outside of what we traditionally call "covenant." They are human before they are anything else. Their mandate is universal from the start—God...

  T he New Covenant and the 144,000: From Exile to Evangelism One of the most overlooked truths in Scripture is that the New Covenant was not first a message to the Gentiles. It was a promise to Israel and Judah in exile . And it was to them first that the fulfillment came. “Behold, the days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah…” — Jeremiah 31:31 This covenant was not a random universal announcement to humanity. It was a redemptive promise to a scattered and broken people—to the tribes of Jacob, estranged by rebellion, idolatry, and exile. And in the first century, this promise began to be fulfilled. The New Covenant Comes to the Dispersion In Acts and the epistles, the apostles are repeatedly sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel . Paul himself, while called to the Gentiles, always started his ministry in the synagogue of each city. Why? Because the New Covenant had to go first to those for whom i...

Esau I Hated: Covenant, Not Calvinism — The Real Story Behind Malachi 1 “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” This infamous phrase, often pulled out of Malachi 1 or Romans 9 to support doctrines of individual predestination, has been burdened with centuries of theological baggage it was never meant to carry. From a biblical and Hebraic point of view—this statement is not about individual election to salvation or damnation. It is about two nations, two covenant trajectories, and ultimately, about how inheritance can be embraced or despised. Malachi 1: Covenant Lawsuit, Not Eternal Decree “I have loved you,” says the LORD. “But you say, ‘How have you loved us?’ Is not Esau Jacob’s brother?” declares the LORD. “Yet I have loved Jacob but Esau I have hated. I have laid waste his hill country...” —Malachi 1:2–3 Malachi is not writing a theological treatise on individual election. He’s delivering a covenant lawsuit against a cynical, post-exilic Israel. They had returned from Babylon, rebuilt t...