Can you please document your claims? I’ll try to document my claims here.

As you know the Tanakh is synonymous for the Law and Prophets. And obviously, the NC/NT is not part of the Law and Prophets.

“F.F. Bruce traces the earliest known references to the two parts of the Bible as ‘Old Covenant’ and ‘New Covenant’ to the end of the 2nd century A.D. in ‘The Canon of Scripture’ (Downers Grove, IL; InterVarsity Press, 1988), 21-22 in ‘The Covenantal Context of the Fall’ by Robert Gonzales Jr.

Ancient near east archaeology has discovered that God Himself designed the the literary structure of the Bible into 2 parts. He structured the OC like an A.N.E. treaty, which is surrounded by a canon of books (the OT). Here is an explanation excerpted from my book “ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled.”

“17. Archaeology Testifies That the Bible Contains 2 Separate Canons (Rules)

Scholars generally agree that archaeology shows God patterned the Old Covenant’s literary structure with several similarities to ancient, near-Eastern treaties.

Ancient covenants were put into effect with a surrounding body of literature, or canon. (Genesis is structured as the historical introduction to the Old Covenant.) Covenant produces canon.

Our Bible is made of 2 major covenants, the Old and New Covenants, each surrounded by its own canon, the Old and New Testaments. Meredith Kline sums it up well in The Structure of Biblical Authority…

Two Covenants Implies 2 Canons

“In fact, if biblical canon is covenantal canon and there are in the composition of the Bible two covenants, one old and one new, there are also two canons, one old and one new. Instead of speaking of the canon of Scripture, we should then speak of the Old and New Testament canons, or of the canonical covenants which constitute the Scripture…the old and new covenant canons…The identity of the Old and New Testaments as two distinct canons and the integrity of each Testament in itself as a separate canonical whole…the two covenantal canons…”

Two Testaments Implies 2 Canon Rules

“…the two Testaments which serve as community rules for the two orders…they are two discrete canons in series…two treaty canons, old and new, within the church’s Scriptures”

The Old Testament Canon Does Not Govern the Church

“This is to say that the Old Testament is not the canon of the Christian church…the Old Testament, though possessing the general authority of all the Scriptures, does not possess for the church the more specific authority of canonicity. Under the new covenant, the Old Testament is not the current canon.”

The New Testament Canon Governs the Church

“…the treaty canon that governs the Church of the new covenant as a formal community is the New Testament alone, while Scripture is the broader entity…the Old and New Testaments together….the New Testament canon is the currently normative canon for the church…”

It sounds like he is saying that the New Covenant is not an addendum, codicil, P.S., or rider added onto the Old Covenant. The New Covenant is a separate covenant, with a separate canon (rule).

“…the New Covenant is not an addendum, codicil, P.S., or rider added onto the Old Covenant.”

The Old and New Covenants contain contract duties. The old contract was cancelled. The new contract is in force. Our duties are defined by the covenant that we’re under. We’re under the New Covenant, not the Old Covenant. Therefore, our duties are defined by the New Covenant.” (ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled, pp. 94-95)

Plus, the 2 articles below suggest 2 things:

1. The terms OT and NT are found in the Bible itself as valid translations of the Hebrew (Jer. 31) and Greek.

2. The terms OT and NT were first used ~200 A.D.

“The term “Old Testament” itself is credited to Melito of Sardis.[1] Tertullian also used the Latin vetus testamentum.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Testament

“Some believe the English term New Testament ultimately comes from the Hebrew language. New Testament is taken from the Latin Novum Testamentum first coined by Tertullian. Some believe this in turn is a translation of the earlier Koine Greek Καινή Διαθήκη (pronounced in postclassical Greek as Keni Dhiathiki). This Greek term is found in the original Greek language of the New Testament, though commonly translated as new covenant, and found even earlier in the Greek translation of the Old Testament that is called the Septuagint. At Jeremiah 31:31, the Septuagint translated this term into Greek from the original Hebrew ברית חדשה (berit chadashah). The Hebrew term is usually also translated into English as new covenant.

As a result, some claim the term was first used by Early Christians to refer to the new covenant that was the basis for their relationship with God. About two centuries later at the time of Tertullian and Lactantius, the phrase was being used to designate a particular collection of books that some believed embodied this new covenant.

Tertullian, in the 2nd century, is the first currently known to use the terms novum testamentum/new testament and vetus testamentum/old testament. For example, in Against Marcion book 3,[6] chapter 14, he wrote:

This may be understood to be the Divine Word, who is doubly edged with the two testaments of the law and the gospel

And in book 4,[7] chapter 6, he wrote:

For it is certain that the whole aim at which he has strenuously laboured even in the drawing up of his Antitheses, centres in this, that he may establish a diversity between the Old and the New Testaments, so that his own Christ may be separate from the Creator, as belonging to this rival god, and as alien from the law and the prophets.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament#The_history_of_translation_and_usage_of_the_term_New_Testament

So, now lets see who can ask questions of relevence applying the truth of the biblical writings. In other words ask questions as you would if the book had not been dimwittedly divided or put together with mans additions and deletions.