The verse you quoted in
Hebrews 8 . . .
[13] In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
Is preceded by verse 8
Hebrews 8:8 KJV
[8] For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a
new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Which is a quote from
Jeremiah 31 . . .
[31] Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
[32] Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
So the
NEW COVENANT spoken of in
Hebrews 8:13, is prophesied of in
Jeremiah 31, which as you know is in the OT.
But if you are asking how the covenant mentioned in
Exodus 19 came to be referred to as the
OLD COVENANT my answer to that is that the author of the book you posted on here (Allen Walker?) is the one who said that it was the old covenant.
I say that it became the
OLD COVENANT by applying the rule in
Hebrews 8:13. When he saith a new covenant . . .
If there is a new covenant, then by default, the pre-existing covenant would become old.
Therefore, if the covenant made in
Exodus 20 was different than the one in
Exodus 19, as Allen Walker claims, and not part of the covenant that contains the Ten Commandments (as I believe) then the previous one (chapter 19) would be old already, even though it is only three days old. This is completely illogical to me.
Do you believe that the covenant mentioned in
Exodus 19 is separate from the covenant sprinkled with blood in
Exodus 24?
I do not.
Remember the distinction of chapter numbers was added to the Bible. If you take away the chapter numbers, and simply read the book of Exodus, it will look like one story, about one covenant. The structure of that covenant is the Ten Commandments.