By Keith
Thompson
Various people falsely maintain
Christians are obligated to keep the Law of Moses. Seventh Day Adventists for
instance hold Christians are under the Sabbath and Ten Commandments.
Theonomists or Reconstructionists believe Christians are under the “moral” and
“civil” parts of the Mosaic Law, but not the “ceremonial.” Certain Protestants
who hold to Covenant Theology maintain only the “moral” laws of Moses are in
effect, while the “civil” and “ceremonial” are not. Catholics hold essentially
the same view. Some Black Hebrew Israelite sects claim the Law of Moses is
still in effect. And various renegade teachers out there assert Christians are
bound to Mosaic Law as well.
In this essay I am going to defend
the position that Christians are not under the Law of Moses but instead are
under the Law of Christ found in the New Covenant scriptures. This position is
part of New Covenant Theology. After my study into the matter I am persuaded it
is indeed the biblical view. New Covenant Theology says the Old Covenant and
Law of Moses (which are inseparable) have been fulfilled and made obsolete by
Christ. Nothing in the Mosaic Law is to be observed unless Jesus and the
Apostles ratified it in the New Covenant scriptures. Everything else has been
abrogated and made obsolete. This is because Jesus fulfilled the Law through
his life, death and resurrection and ushered in the New Covenant with its set
of precepts or rules.
Much of the Old Testament Law was Only Meant for Ancient Israelites
In his masterful essay The Law of Moses and the Christian: A
Compromise David A. Dorsey convincingly demonstrated much of the Mosaic Law
is simply not applicable to people who are not ancient Israelites.
He notes many laws were meant to
“regulate the lives of people in the distinctive geographical and climatic
conditions found in the southern Levant, and many of the regulations are
inapplicable, unintelligible, or even nonsensical outside that regime.”(1) Here
he mentions many laws such as the one in Exodus 29:22 regulating the offering of
the ‘fat tail’ of the ram which only exists in a limited geographical location,
the law in Exodus 23:11 regulating cultivation of the olive tree which is also
rare geographically, etc.
He then notes many laws were
“designed by God to regulate the lives of a people whose cultural milieu was
that of the ancient Near East.”(2) Here he mentions many laws such as
Deuteronomy 17:14-20’s regulations on the style of hereditary kingship
practiced in the ancient Near East, Deuteronomy 20:19-20’s regulations on ancient
Near Eastern siege practices, etc.
He then mentions many laws that only
make sense in the context of the religious milieu of a person in the ancient
Near East, or for a person in an actual politically – and geographically
defined nation, or for a person in a cultic regime that has been discontinued
by the Church.(3) So, when people today around the world claim they are under
the Law of Moses, it is absurd.
The New Testament Teaches Christians are not Under the Law
of Moses
According to the Law of Moses all
Jews were required to pay a temple tax (Exodus 30:13-16). However, in Matthew
17:26 Jesus declared “the sons are free” from this temple tax, indicating the
temporary nature of the Mosaic Law.
Moreover, Thomas Schreiner notes(4) instead of solely focusing on
the commandments of the Law of Moses, which is what one would expect if the
Mosaic Law was meant for Christians, Jesus instead often spoke of “my
commandments” (John 14:15, 21; 15:10), “my commandment” (John 15:12), what “I command
you” (John 15:14, 17) and “the new commandment that I give to you” (John
13:34), etc. This supports New Covenant Theology. Similar language is also
present in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:21-22, 27-28, 31-35, 38-39,
43-44).
What is more, in John 1:16-17 we read, “16For
from his fullness we have all received, grace for grace. 17For the law was
given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.” (John
1:16-17). When verse 16 says the Jewish Christians were given “grace for grace”
the Greek word “for” is the preposition anti
which should be rendered as “instead of” or “in place of.” So when you take vv.
16-17 together what is being said is the grace found in Christ has been given
“in the place” of the grace found in the Law of Moses. Hence, Christians are
not under the Law of Moses.
In the Acts 15 Council of Jerusalem
the Apostles and Elders convened to settle the question of weather or not
Gentile Christians need to be circumcised to be saved. Not only did the council
conclude Gentile Christians do not need to be circumcised, but it also
concluded they are not under the Law of Moses and that ancient Jews and modern
Jewish Christians like the Apostles have not even been able to keep the Law of
Moses:
“10Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they [the Gentiles] will’ . . . . 19Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, 20but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood.” (Acts 15:10-11, 19-20).
Notice in vv. 10-11 Peter declares
both Jew and Gentile Christians are not to have the Law like a yoke around
their necks since it is unbearable and the way people are saved is instead the
grace of Jesus. A “yoke” or zugos in
the Greek was a restraint put on the necks of animals that were tasked with
pulling heavy loads.(5)
This clearly means Christians are
not under the unbearable restraint of the Law of Moses. Moreover, in vv. 19-20
James then goes on to say Gentiles should not be troubled (i.e., by circumcision
or the Law of Moses) but instead should abide by New Covenant Law which instead
simply includes things such as abstaining from things polluted by idols, sexual
immorality, from what has been strangled, and blood, etc. This is New Covenant
Theology clearly demonstrating believers are not under Mosaic Law.
What is more, in Acts 10:11-15 Peter
had a vision wherein Jesus declared foods clean for the New Covenant – foods
which the Mosaic Law prescribed were unclean or unlawful:
“11and saw the heavens opened and something like a great sheet descending, being let down by its four corners upon the earth. 12In it were all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air. 13And there came a voice to him: ‘Rise, Peter; kill and eat.’ 14But Peter said, ‘By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.’ 15And the voice came to him again a second time, ‘What God has made clean, do not call common’” (Acts 10:11-15).
This is confirmed by Jesus in Mark 7:18-19 when
Jesus said: “Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside
cannot defile him, since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is
expelled?’ (Thus he declared all foods clean.)” Mark’s inspired commentary on
Jesus’ teaching is Jesus was declaring all foods clean. Thomas Schreiner notes
the word “defile” here (i.e., koinoō) in v. 18 “confirms that food laws in the
Old Testament are under consideration.”(6) And it was Peter’s eyewitness
testimony which was behind Mark’s gospel. This means according to Peter Jesus
held the dietary laws in the Law of Moses were done away with. Such dietary
laws can be found in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14. This is, again, because
Christians are now under New Covenant rules and not the Law of Moses. In Romans
14 Paul also teaches all foods are now clean for believers (Romans 14:14, 20).
He says, “I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who
thinks it unclean. . . . Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God.
Everything is indeed clean, but it is
wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats.” (Romans 14:14, 20).
In Galatians 3:19 Paul affirms the temporary
nature of the Mosaic Law when he says it “was added because of transgressions,
until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made” (Galatians
3:19). S. M. Baugh and Thomas Schreiner
point out “offspring” of Abraham here refers to Christ and so the text is
saying the Law was given until the coming of Christ.(7)
In Romans 6:14 Paul says Christians “are not under the Law.”
And in Romans 7:6 Paul says “we are released from the Law.” Likewise in Romans
10:4 Paul says “Christ is the end of the Law.” Also, in Ephesians 2:15 Paul
talks about God “abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances.”
Frank Thielman notes the word for “abolishing” here is katargēsas and it is used elsewhere by Paul when discussing the Law
being “set aside” (e.g. 2 Corinthians 3:7; Romans 7:2, 6). He notes here
“believers [are] being ‘released’ from the law just as a wife is released when
her husband dies, from the law binding her to him.”(8)
Lastly, Paul repeatedly states circumcision is
no longer necessary to be part of the people of God (Romans 3:30; 4:9-12; 1
Corinthians 7:19; Galatians 5:6; 6:15). Yet, according to the Law of Moses
circumcision was a strict command (Leviticus 12:3; Joshua 5:1-9). This means
Paul knew the Mosaic Law was temporary.
The Mosaic Law is Part of the Mosaic Covenant which is now
Obsolete
If the Old Covenant is obsolete then
the Mosaic Law is as well. This is because the Mosaic Law is part of the Old
Covenant. Modern scholarly research (e.g. George E. Mendenhall’s book Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient
Near East) reveals ancient Near Eastern people (such as Hittites) would
often form treaties with others involving agreements and laws similar to the
Mosaic covenant we find in the Old Testament between God and the Israelites.
Many scholars affirm the Old Testament was drawing from this ancient practice
of Israel’s neighbors, or that there is some sort of connection. In both cases,
the stipulations or laws were part of the covenant / treaty. Thus, if a
covenant became obsolete, the laws of that covenant would as well. When God
made a covenant with Moses and the Israelites, he made an agreement. That is
what a covenant is – an agreement with stipulations. The agreement was that God
rescued the Israelites out of Egypt, and that the keeping of the Mosaic Law led
to blessings, and the transgression of it led to curses (Exodus 20:2-3; 19:3-6;
Deuteronomy 28:1-68).
Hence, the fact the New Testament explicitly states the Old
Covenant is now obsolete (Hebrews 8:13), means the Laws of that Covenant are
likewise obsolete. Again, the law is part of the covenant. This means
Christians are not under the Laws of the obsolete Old Covenant. Instead,
Christians are now under New Covenant rules of Jesus and the Apostles. This is
why the New Testament repeatedly talks about “the law of Christ” (1 Corinthians
9:21; Galatians 6:2), and his (i.e., Jesus') commandments (John 13:34; 14:15, 21; 15:10; 15:12; 15:14, 17; Matthew 5:21-22, 27-28,
31-35, 38-39, 43-44).
This is confirmed by 2 Corinthians 3. There the Apostle Paul
contrasts the “New Covenant” with the “Old Covenant” (vv. 6-7, 14). He even
connects the Old Covenant with the Law of Moses when he mentions “the ministry
of death, carved in letters on stone,” (v. 7), and when he recalls “when they
read the old covenant,” (v. 14) and “whenever Moses is read” (v. 15). Hence, since Paul connects the Mosaic Law with
the Old Covenant, and since he affirms the Old Covenant is replaced by the New,
it follows the Mosaic Law is likewise replaced and obsolete.
Christians are not under the Sabbath Law
Various groups including Seventh Day
Adventists teach Sabbath Law is still in effect. However, Sabbath was part of
the Old Covenant Mosaic Law which we have demonstrated is now obsolete. Sabbath
rest was the covenant sign for the Mosaic Covenant, similar to how the rainbow
was the covenant sign of the Noahic Covenant (Genesis 9:8-17), and how
circumcision was the covenant sign of the Abrahamic Covenant (Genesis 17).
Since the Mosaic Covenant is now obsolete, the sign of the covenant (i.e.,
Sabbath) is as well.
Moreover, in Romans 14:5 Paul says “One person
esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike.
Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.” When Paul mentions those
who esteem one day as better than another, he is no doubt talking about the
Sabbath day of rest.(9) Yet, he shows indifference regarding the issue which
means Christians are not obligated to keep the Sabbath Law. If Christians were
obligated to keep it then Paul would not be so indifferent. Yet, according to
the Law of Moses Sabbath was a strict command (e.g. Deuteronomy 5:14). Hence,
according to the New Testament the Mosaic Law and the Sabbath command found in
it are no longer in effect.
In Colossians 2:16-17 Paul calls the Sabbath a
mere “shadow” along with certain food and festival requirements. The word for
“shadow” here (skia) and it is the
same word the author of the book of Hebrews uses to describe obsolete
sacrifices of the Mosaic Law which are no longer in effect (Hebrews 10:1).
Thus, Sabbath keeping, as a shadow, is likewise no longer in effect.
This information demonstrates according to the
Bible it is sinful for groups to claim Christians are obligated to keep the
Sabbath Law.
Now, many of the people who claim Christians are
still under the Sabbath are viciously opposed to Sunday worship. They claim it
is either a false Roman Catholic invention or a Roman pagan practice that
infected the church. However, such thinking is erroneous and contrary to fact.
Sunday worship is biblical and primitive. Acts 20:7 tells us Troas believers “On the first day of the week . . . gathered together to
break bread” and then they heard a long message or
sermon from Paul. Moreover, Paul commanded Christians to give money to the poor
“on the first day of every week” (1 Corinthians 6:2). And Revelation 1:10 says
“on the Lord’s day” John heard a loud voice from heaven. We know Jesus rose
from the dead on Sunday or the first day of the week (Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1).
Thus, the “Lord’s Day” is Sunday Resurrection Day when Jesus’ sacrifice and
resurrection are to be celebrated by believers in gathering.
Because of this evidence the earliest Christian
writers after the New Testament went on to affirm Sunday worship instead of
Saturday Sabbath rest. These writings were composed long before the Roman
Catholic Church existed. Therefore, it is factually incorrect to say the Roman
Catholic Church gave us Sunday worship or that pagan Rome did. In the first
century Christian document known as the Didache
we read “But every Lord’s day . . . gather
yourselves together and break bread, and give thanksgiving” (Didache, 14). Writing around A.D. 110
the Christian Elder Ignatius of Antioch wrote “Those who were brought up in the
ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer
observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord’s day, on which
also our life has sprung up again by him and by his death” (Ignatius, Letter
to the Magnesians, 8). Likewise, writing in the mid-second century
Christian apologist Justin Martyr wrote, “But Sunday is the day on which we all
hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having
wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ
our Savior on the same day rose from the dead” (Justin Martyr, First Apology, 67).
Trying to Keep Mosaic Law is Impossible and Leads to
Damnation
Those who falsely say Christians are
still under the Law of Moses must realize it is impossible to keep it. There
are 613 Laws and legalists must be pressed to realize they do not keep them.
Although they think they do, they are actually hypocrites who do not. For
example, ask them if they put tzitzit on the corners of their clothing (Num.
15:38), if they bind tefillin on their head and arm (Deut. 6:8), if they affix
the mezuzah to the doorposts and gates of their house (Deut. 6:9), if they make
sure to read the Shema every the morning and evening (Deut. 6:7), if they
remove chametz on the Eve of Passover (Ex. 12:15), if they examine the marks of
all cows their beef comes from (Lev. 11:2), if they examine the marks of all
the fishes their fish meat comes from (Lev. 11:9), if they slay cattle, deer
and fowl according to the slaughter laws (Deut. 12:21), if they never eat flesh
with milk (Ex. 34:26), if they never make loans on interest (Lev. 25:37), if
they never borrow on interest (Deut. 23:20), and if on the Sabbath they abstain
from sowing, baking, washing wool, tying and making loops (i.e., tying shoe
laces), tanning, writing two or more letters (including in texts, facebook or
internet), erasing two or more letters, building, making a fire, putting the
finishing touch on an object, or transporting an object between a private and
public domain, etc. If they do any of these things on Sabbath, they are violating
Sabbath Law and are hypocrites for putting Christians under it.
Peter knew Mosaic Law was impossible
and thus, again, stated he and the ancient Jews were not even able to bear it
(Acts 15:10). Paul also knew Mosaic Law was impossible and thus in Romans 3:9-20
he says man’s universal wickedness shows the Law is like a mirror revealing how
evil everyone is (vv. 9-20). This then informs his conclusion that no one will
be justified by law observance (v. 20) since man is too wicked and the Law is
too perfect. His logic is it is not possible to keep the law to God’s
satisfaction and be justified by that means. Paul’s solution comes in v. 25
which says therefore God sent Jesus to be our propitiatory sacrifice received
by faith. Thus, while law is impossible because of our fallen condition and
merely reveals how sinful we are like a mirror, faith in Jesus is instead what
leads to right standing with God.
In Galatians 3:10 Paul teaches since we are now under the
New Covenant, those who rely on keeping the Mosaic Law are cursed: “For all who
rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed be
everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and
do them’” (Galatians 3:10). Paul’s logic here is if you rely on keeping Mosaic
Law you are cursed since if you take that route you must keep it perfectly
which is impossible. The same logic is found in Galatians 5:3: “I testify again
to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole
law.” This teaching is confirmed by James 2:10 which says, “For whoever keeps
the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it.” On
this text Douglas J. Moo notes, “James is not suggesting that anyone is in
reality fulfilling every demand of the law; he simply puts forth a ‘suppose it
were so’ assumption. That person, were he to stumble at even one ‘point’ (or
commandment) is guilty of breaking it all.”(10) The point is if you rely on
keeping the whole law or even just portions of it like circumcision or Sabbath
then you are obligated to keep all of it which is impossible and leads to
death. This is why Paul says the following:
“For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (2 Corinthians 3:6).“For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death” (Romans 8:2).
The Mosaic Law Can’t be Divided
Roman Catholics as well as
Protestants who hold to Covenant Theology both erroneously teach Christians are
under the “moral” aspects of the Law of Moses, but not the “ceremonial” or
“civil” aspects. Theonomists or Reconstructionists are similar but they say
Christians are under the “moral” and
“civil” aspects, but not the “ceremonial” which they say is now obsolete.
However, all of these people are
incorrect. The Law of Moses should not be divided into three categories (moral,
ceremonial and civil). The law is the law. It is either in effect through
Mosaic Covenant or its not. This idea of a three-fold division of the law as
the basis for establishing continuity or discontinuity of the testaments is
just not biblical or historical. Instead, it goes back to 13th
century Catholic writer Thomas Aquinas.(11) It is also absent from the early
Rabbinic literature.(12) It is indeed the product of modern Christian theology.
When Catholics and New Covenant
theologians claim they are under the “moral” law but not the “ceremonial,” that
is fuzzy since often times its hard to tell the difference between the two. For
example, the law forbidding the taking of interest on loans is clearly moral
(Exodus 22:25). Yet, it was given to Israel in the context of it being an
agricultural society and so has a ceremonial element.(13) Similarly, while
Theonomists distinguish between “moral” and “civil” law, such a distinction is
also fuzzy. This is because it can be shown civil laws of the Old Testament
have a moral element.(14)
It must be asked: which of the 613
Laws of Moses is not “moral”? They all are. So the idea of classifying some
laws as “moral” and others as “ceremonial” or “civil” is problematic. As David
A. Dorsey notes, “The Sabbath, the parapet law, the prohibition against
muzzling of the treading ox – all the so-called ‘ceremonial’ and ‘civic’ laws
embody or flesh out eternal moral and ethical principles.”(15)
The fact is the New Testament speaks
of the Law of Moses in monolithic terms which is not what one would expect if
this three-fold division idea is true, and if certain categories remain valid
while others do not. Dorsey concludes,
“Legal obligation to only a portion of the corpus is nowhere suggested. If one is legally bound to the law, it is to the entire law, including every ‘minor’ stipulation, that he is bound. Paul writes: ‘I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obliged to obey the whole law’ (Gal 5:3). James states that the violation of one law makes one guilty of the whole law (Jas 2:10). . . . In Gal 3:24-25 Paul declares that ‘the law’ – not just one category of laws – was a schoolmaster whose task was to bring us to Christ, and now that it has completed its task ‘we are no longer under the law.’ In none of these or similar passages is there any statement regarding categories of laws.”(16)
Conclusion
We showed much of the Mosaic Law
only makes sense for ancient Israelites. We proved Jesus and the apostles
taught the Mosaic Law is obsolete. We demonstrated the Mosaic Law is part of
the Old Covenant which is now obsolete. We showed Christians are not under the
Sabbath and that Christian Sunday worship is neither Roman Catholic nor pagan-based.
Instead it is biblical and primitive. We proved trying to keep Mosaic Law, or
even just portions of it, results in damnation since keeping the Law is
impossible and was only meant to point us to Christ. Finally, we demonstrated
it is erroneous to divide the law into three categories.
The New Testament teaches the Law of
Moses is gone and obsolete. Jesus fulfilled the Law with his life of obedience,
death and resurrection which enacted the New Covenant. Christians must now
follow the rules given by Jesus and the Apostles as covenants come with rules.
Anything in the Law of Moses that is not ratified by Jesus and the Apostles is
not applicable to Christians. Anyone who relies on the Law of Moses, or
portions of it, will not be saved.
Endnotes
1) David A. Dorsey, “The Law of
Moses and the Christian: A Compromise,” JETS
34, [1991], p. 325
2) Ibid. 327
3) Ibid. 227-228
4) Thomas R. Schreiner, 40 Questions About Christians and Biblical
Law, [Kregel, 2010], p. 191
5) David G. Peterson, The
Acts of the Apostles, ed. D. A. Carson, The
Pillar New Testament Commentary, [Wm B. Eerdmans, 2009], p. 426
6) Thomas
R. Schreiner, 40 Questions About
Christians and Biblical Law, [Kregel, 2010], p. 162
7) S. M. Baugh, “Galatians 3:20 and the Covenant of Redemption,”
WTJ 66, [2004], p. 53. n. 17; Thomas Schreiner, Galatians, ed. Clinton E. Arnold, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, [Zondervan,
2010], p. 241
8) Frank Thielman, Ephesians, ed. Yarborough et al., Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New
Testament, [Baker Academic, 2010], p. 168
9) Douglas
J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans,
ed. Gordon D. Fee, The New International
Commentary on the New Testament, [Wm B. Eerdmans, 1996], p. 842
10) Douglas J. Moo, James,
ed. D. A. Carson, The Pillar New Testament
Commentary, [Wm B. Eerdmans, 2000], p. 114
11) D. A. Carson, Mystery and Fulfilment: Toward a More
Comprehensive Paradigm of Paul’s Understanding of the Old and New, eds.
Carson et al, Justification and
Variegated Nomism, Vol. 2, [Baker Academic, 2004], p. 429 n. 108
12) David A. Dorsey, “The Law of
Moses and the Christian: A Compromise,” JETS 34, [1991], p. 329
13) Thomas R. Schreiner, 40 Questions About Christians and Biblical
Law, [Kregel, 2010], p. 90
14) Ibid. p. 92
15) David A. Dorsey, “The Law of
Moses and the Christian: A Compromise,” JETS 34, [1991], p. 330
16) Ibid. 330
No comments:
Post a Comment