All comes down to just how new was and is the new Covenant then? Brand new, as Baptists hold, or a continuation and fulfillment of old One, as remainder hold it as being?
We might answer this by asking what Jesus said:
Luke 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying,
This cup [is] the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.
1 Corinthians 11:25 After the same manner also [he took] the cup, when he had supped, saying,
This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink [it], in remembrance of me.
Given that it was prophesied in the OT that He was going to be crucified (not in that terminology, but is discernable as we look back to the prophesies), His soon to come crucifixion was/is a fulfillment of the system of sacrifices, thus providing the atonement (price paid in full), which facilitated the OT saints being released from their captivity in Sheol, and all believers thereafter being in paradise with the Lord without going into captivity.
Was it new for that day, yes, but it was also a fulfillment. Was it new in that it does not put upon us the burden and curse of the Law, yes, but it also is the Power that removed mankind from under the burden and yoke of the Law.
This is the nature of the systematic approach, taking in the panorama of what scripture says on the subject.
Romans is an amazing book that shows to us that we are not under the curse of the Law any longer, with the power of that curse broken only by the shed blood of Christ Jesus; and yet there are movements out there teaching that we are still bound by requirements to do the best we can to live by the Law. That would fit the new covenant into the compartment of neither fulfillment nor being new. To them all that has changed is is the requirement for ceremonial Law in the sacrifices, with all else still a yoke upon us. To them, that was the lightening of the yoke they think Yahshua spoke of then saying that His yoke is light (less Law).
Uhh. No. I don't buy that for a minute. Romans and Hebrews, among other of the epistles, are too emphatic, not to mention Acts 15. It all collectively establishes that the Law is still a living force in this creation, but not in the sense that it is binding upon the Church for obedience to all the precepts and ordinances apart from sacrifices. How is it a living force that is still valid today? Simply this:
Romans 5:13 For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Romans 7:7-8
7 What shall we say then? [Is] the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. 8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin [was] dead.
1 Corinthians 15:56 The sting of death [is] sin; and the strength of sin [is] the law.
James 2:9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.
1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
There are many other verses I could quote, but suffice it to say that the Law is the power of condemnation upon those who are without Christ. Without the Law, there would be no sin by which the lost would be condemned.
So, it cannot be said that the new covenant is totally new in that it has no ties to the old covenant of Law and the prophecies.
Jeremiah 31:33 But
this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Romans 2:15 Which shew
the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and [their] thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another
So, given that the new covenant still has the Law within it, the tablets of stone are no longer where we look for guidance against sin. So, so, it is not totally new in the sense that it still has the undergirding of the foundations of the old covenant by way of the Law. That's an important distinction, and yet similarity.
MM