|
Ten Words on Law and Four Common Questions
Ten basic features of the Mosaic Law which are given by the Old
Testament itself
The Mosaic law was…
1. An expression of God’s glory and
righteousness
See the repeated ‘Be holy for I am holy’ (e.g. Lev 11:44-45)
See also Num 15:30-31; Deut 4:8; 5:24; 28:58;
repeated “finger of God” (Ex 31:18; Deut 9:10); repeated ‘I am the LORD’ (e.g.
Lev 18:2-6).
2. A complete unit to be kept wholesale
See Deut. 12:32
See also Deut 4:2; 5:22; 26:16-19 and Deut
4:44; 5:1; 28:15ff; 29:29; 30:8; 31:12 (and the king 17:18-19); 32:46-47
3. To give a distinctive witness to the nations
For example Deut. 4:6-8
See also Ex. 19:5; 20:1; Deut. 7:6; 28:1, 10
4. Specific to Israel and tied to the promised land
For example Deut. 12:1
See also Ex. 19:5; 20:1, 12; Deut. 4:1, 39-40;
5:15-16, 31; 6:1-3, 15, 20-25; 7:12-13; 8:1, 6-9; 11:8-9, 14, 22, 31-32;
12:8-14; 15:15; 16:1, 20; 31:47
5. Predictive of the exile and of the grace to be shown to Israel
beyond the land (and therefore beyond the specified scope of law)
For instance: Lev. 26:44-46
See also Deut. 4:26-31; 28:36, 49ff; 30:1-6;
31:16f
6. An expression of the covenant…
For example Deut. 5:2
See also Ex. 24:7-8; 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 4:23;
7:9, 12; 8:18; 9:9, 11, 15; 29:1, (v25 shows it’s one covenant) v12
7. … yet distinct from the covenant and under-girded by it
For example Deut. 4:30-31
See also Lev. 26:42, 45; Deut. 6:3, 18; 8:1;
26:16-19; 27:3; 28:9; 31:26
8. Grounded (both explicitly and implicitly) in theological and
historical truths
For example Ex. 20:8-11
See also Ex. 22:21; Deut. 21:22-23; 23:9-14
9. Not just laid down – something to be taught and learnt
For example Deut. 1:5
See also Ex. 24:12; Deut. 4:14; 5:1, 31;
17:18-20; 29:29; 31:12-13; ch32 (esp. v46)
10. To be obeyed by a circumcised heart and fulfilled in the
supernaturally enabled response of fear, love and trust
For example Deut 30:1-20
For more examples see Lev. 26:41; Deut. 10:16;
30:6
A braham proves a case in point – the man of faith who is distinctly
‘apart from law’ is said to have obeyed it fully – Gen. 26:5. For more
examples see also Deut. 5:29; 6:4-6, 13-18; 8:2; 10:12-13, 20-21; 11:1,
13, 22; 13:4; 19:9; 30:6, 10, 16, 20; 31:12
The Law was not opposed to the Promise given 430 years previous (Gal
3:17). It was an expression of the eternal covenant (see point 6 above)
given to the Seed of the woman (Gen 3:15) and in Him to the whole world
(cf. Noah in Gen 9:9ff, then Abraham (Gen 12:7), Isaac (Gen 26:3) and
Jacob (Gen 35:12)). It is not at all opposed to Promise but a particular
packaging of the Gospel given at a particular time in Israel’s history
with a specific ‘shelf-life’.
Everything about the Law was
buttressed by Promise. Its explicit setting was the promised land and its
audience was the people of promise (see point 4). Coming after the
Exodus, Sinai was always a covenant established and fuelled by grace (cf.
Ex 20:2). In it, the LORD, having saved a people for His own possession,
now determines to sanctify them. It is important to see that the LORD is
in no way taking a back seat in the sanctification of His people. He does
not do the redeeming and then let His people ‘catch up’ in the holiness
stakes. He has acted sovereignly and decisively in redemption and now
continues to do so in sanctification. He underwrites His commandments
with His own character (“I am the LORD”) and gifts this holiness to those
who would unite themselves to Him (“Be holy for I am holy). Every ‘you
shall’ which He demands is also a ‘you will be’ for His people to
appropriate by faith (see point 10).
Deuteronomy 26:16-19 is an excellent
study for the inter-relation of the LORD’s action and ours in
sanctification. Fundamentally Israel will be holy because the LORD has
promised to make them so. His promise of holiness (and that alone)
establishes the possibility of Israel’s obedience. Israel’s co-operation
with the LORD in this is guaranteed in and with the covenant-relationship
they have entered.
Four Questions about the Law
Is it possible to fulfil the
law?
Absolutely. Moses enjoins the people
again and again to fulfil it. In Deuteronomy 30:11ff he tells the people
that what the LORD commands is not too difficult for them. Rather it is
in their mouth and in their heart that they may obey it (30:14). Abraham
himself, who did not even have the law, is said to have obeyed it in
Genesis 26:5. The man of faith can be said to have obeyed the LORD’s
‘requirements, commandments, decrees and laws’ since the purpose of the
law is always faith in the LORD who is set forth in it (see point 1). The
New Testament concurs. Those who trust in the LORD Jesus have fulfilled
the righteous requirement of the law (e.g. Rom 8:4) since the purpose of
the law has always been Christ (Rom 10:4).
To the question: ‘Is it possible to be
justified through works of law?’ the answer is of course ‘No’. But that
is to use the law in an entirely inappropriate way – see below.
What is the ‘curse’ of the law (Gal 3:10 - Deut 27:26)?
The law is ‘holy, righteous and good;
(Rom 7:12) and designed to bring a person to Christ (Rom 10:4; Gal 3:24)
yet there is a way of approaching the law which leads to condemnation.
The curse of the law is to live as though legal obedience is the way to
belong to God’s people. It should be clear that the status of ‘the people
of God’ is conferred independently of any obedience shown on the people’s
part. The people are saved prior to the giving of the law and the people
are then gifted obedience in the law. No-one could ever boast that their
adherence to the stipulations of the law constituted their relationship
with the LORD. To consider the law like this is to fall into the trap of
all human religion. It is to imagine that religion is about ‘my approach
to God’. The Scriptures give us the opposite story. The Gospel is that
the LORD has approached me and taken hold of me in my ignorance and
disobedience and by grace has redeemed me to be His own. None of my
efforts have contributed to this salvation. If I consider myself to have
earned the LORD’s favour through obedience to the law I exalt myself over
Him and credit to my own account that which belongs exclusively to Him.
When I approach the law properly I see
in it the LORD’s righteousness – not mine. I see it judging the filthy
rags of my own righteousness and renounce myself, accepting His
righteousness as a gift. When I approach the law ‘in the flesh’ I see in
it an opportunity to display my righteousness. I come to every ‘you
shall’ and set out to prove my uprightness in it. Yet to understand the
law rightly I must see that the ‘you shalls’ do not describe me as I am.
Nor do they describe me if only I’d apply myself more diligently. Instead
they describe the holiness of the LORD, a holiness He will give to those
who trust Him. When I see this, every ‘you shall’ becomes the promise
‘you will be’ in the LORD. This is to understand the Law in the Spirit.
We misunderstand Paul if we think his
fundamental contrast is between law and gospel. He takes great pains to
establish that the law is not opposed to the gospel at all (e.g. Gal
3:21). The distinction he wishes to make is between the flesh and the
Spirit. The flesh takes a good law and twists it to make it an
opportunity for self-righteousness. Viewed this way, the law is a curse.
Yet when I approach the law correctly, the Spirit takes the law and, by
it, leads me to Christ (Rom 8:4).
What is the difference between the law then and the law now?
In John 5:39ff, Jesus condemns Bible students for diligently studying the
law yet not coming to Christ. The mistake of unbelieving Jews was to
worship the law and not the One to Whom the law pointed. The law was
always a shadow – the substance has always belonged to Christ (Col 2:17).
An OT believer was never to trust the Temple or the sacrifices or the
priests or the law or their own legal observance. The OT itself regularly
condemns such false hopes. Only in the ‘LORD our Righteousness’ (Jer
23:6) can Israel be righteous. Thus, in the deepest sense, how we
approach the law has not changed at all. The law has never provided a way
of salvation and it never will.
Yet, from the time of Moses to the
time of Christ, Israel was called on to uphold the Sinai covenant. This
covenant was rigidly self-contained – its audience (Israel), its
time-scale (until Jesus, the Prophet like Moses, ended the true exile)
and its geographical boundaries (within the promised land) were all specifically
defined. Israel, waiting for their Messiah, living out the law in the
promised land, were to be a witness to the whole world of the LORD’s
righteousness (see Ex 19:4-6; Deut 4:6-8).
This law encompassed every aspect of
their existence. No area of life was untouched by Sinai’s discipleship
programme. From morning until evening, the Israelites were confronted
with such gospel truths as sin, death, atonement, devotion to the LORD,
holiness, charity, the new creation – all in the details of their everyday
lives. These regulations were profoundly prophetic in nature. Even the
disposal of corpses Deut 21:23 and the provision of refuge for
manslaughter (Num 35:25) had very deep Messianic significance. The
centre-piece of their national life was the Temple – a massive
multi-media presentation of the work of atonement which the Messiah would
effect. As we’ve said – all of these shadows were not to be worshipped as
the reality but only as patterns and types pointing to Christ (e.g. Ex
26:30; 27:8).
In this way the law was Israel’s
school-teacher (Gal 3:24). It taught the nation as a whole what it looks
like to trust in the LORD in every aspect of its life. It was a
comprehensive teaching programme designed specifically for a people
waiting for their Messiah.
We can see, therefore at least four
reasons why a line had to be drawn under the covenant of Sinai:
Firstly, Sinai’s ordinances were prophetic of the incarnate work of the
Messiah. Their continued use after Christ had cried ‘It is finished’ is
not just inappropriate – it is blasphemous unbelief.
Secondly, and this is related to the first reason, the law was added
‘because of transgressions’ (Gal 3:19; Rom 5:20; 7:9). From Genesis 2:17
until Exodus 20 there had only been one divine commandment – do not eat from
the tree. Thus, humanity was dying under the weight of one transgression
– Adam’s. The law is added so that transgression might increase. Suddenly
sin is mapped by and enticed by hundreds more commandments. Sin
increases, yet, as Romans 5:20 assures us, grace more than exceeds the
increase of transgression. At the cross, the LORD Jesus defeats not just
the one sin of Adam, but proves Himself victor over the innumerable
transgressions defined by the Mosaic law. The law has magnified the work
of grace accomplished at the cross. Yet, once again it is clear that the
cry ‘It is finished’ puts an end to this use of the law.
Thirdly, the arrangements of the Old Covenant were necessarily
nationalistic. All these rituals and ordinances defined Israel as Israel.
Those who wanted to join the worship of the God of Israel had to join the
nation of Israel.
This could not continue indefinitely. From the very beginning of
Israel’s existence, the LORD made it clear that all nations were to be
blessed in Abraham’s offspring (Gen 12:2-3). The LORD’s plan to bless the
world was not to make everyone an Israelite. The great hope for the
fulfilment of the ages was not a world full of ethnic Abrahamites, but a
world full of many nations who had been blessed in Abraham’s seed (Gal
3:7-9). Once the Messiah performed His long-awaited work, the Gospel was
going to burst the banks of OT Israel and flood the world. When this
happened there could be no room for exclusive nationalistic practices.
Sinai has reached its sell-by date.
Fourthly, and most importantly, with the birth of the Offspring, Israel
had come to maturity. The law of Moses, as school-teacher, was no longer
needed. Thus, in the incarnate work of Christ, the covenant of Sinai
found a natural consummation.
So have we moved beyond Sinai? Well,
Galatians 3 would tell us that we’ve actually moved backwards. Abraham
pre-dates Moses. Genesis 12 pre-dates Exodus 20. Gospel has always been
prior to law. In this sense the New Covenant is older than the Old. The
Old Covenant served its purpose from Moses until Incarnation yet
under-girding it all has been an eternal New Covenant (Hosea 6:7; Heb
13:20). We are not under the Mosaic law, just as Abraham was not under
law. We follow in father Abraham’s foot-steps, he was the man of faith
and in this way we are members of the LORD’s divine family. Sinai does
not apply to us – certainly not in the way it applied to Moses’
generation.
How do we read and apply the Old Covenant?
Some want to make a three-fold
distinction in law between moral, civil and ceremonial. They believe the
moral is still in effect while the other two are abrogated. I deal with
this view here.
I reject the threefold distinction
mainly because it is piecemeal and arbitrary. The law is always set forth
in the Old Testament as a whole, to obeyed in its fullness. In the New
Testament it is similarly regarded as a whole (Gal 5:3) – adherence to
one part brings you under the whole system. To think that we carve up the
law and hold onto only the ‘moral’ is not only out of step with the law’s
self-understanding, it also proves impossible in practice. The Bible does
not consider ethics, salvation and worship as well-defined categories to
be demarcated. We do well not to force a distinction.
Thus we must deal with the Mosaic Law
as a whole. This is the way it demands to be treated. So if we ask ‘does
the Law still apply?’ we must answer emphatically with a no, and (at the
same time) emphatically with a yes!
We say ‘no’ because Sinai was a
specific covenant made with a specific people at a specific time. We are
not those people. (See four reasons above)
We say ‘yes’ because the same
Righteous LORD sets forth His unchanging holiness in Moses’ law even if
it is directed to a particular audience. Thus, as a true and righteous
law of God, we must heed it. Yet as a particular expression of the LORD’s
will, the terms by which we seek to apply it will alter. Everything that
was written in the past is for us (Rom 15:4; 1 Cor 10:11) yet none of it
remains unaffected by the finished work of Christ.
Even such a straightforward command as
‘honour your father and mother’ (Ex 20:12) must be applied in a different
way than under Sinai – after all the command continues ‘that you may live
long in the land.’ Every jot and tittle of the law remains (Matt 5:18)
yet none of it remains entirely as it did in those thousand years from
Sinai to Golgotha.
Thus in order to apply the OT law
rightly we must gain a very deep understanding of the New Covenant
rationale underlying the commands of Moses. This seems to be the New
Testament’s way of applying the law. In applying Deuteronomy 25:4 about
the muzzling of oxen Paul’s application is about paying gospel workers (1
Tim 5:18). In 1 Corinthians 5:8 he entreats us to keep the festival of
unleavened bread but by being sincere and truthful in our congregational
life. In Matthew 18:15-17 Jesus tells His disciples that non-violent
church discipline fulfils an OT civil law requiring capital punishment
(Deut 19:15). In all of these cases (representing so called ‘moral’,
‘ceremonial’ and ‘civil’ laws) the law is upheld. Yet the way we are to
uphold each of them is not in terms of the national life of OT Israel.
The terms of application are different.
The New Covenant thrust is discerned in
the Old Covenant ordinance and then applied to the believer. This pattern
by no means answers all our questions, but I believe it is the way
modelled for us in the Scriptures.
All of this forces us to have a very
deep understanding of Moses’ law and the life of Israel. We must read
with ‘spiritual eyes’ to discern more and more the substance of these OT
shadows. What does it mean to refrain from war for the first year of
marriage when the Church (the True Israel) is not involved in military
campaign? Is it a fair reading to apply this to front-line gospel work?
What do the ordinances about not mixing materials (Lev 19:19) point to?
Are we to consider the compromise in our own lives when wearing such
clothes?
All these are the sorts of things we
must think through. The Law is a shadow, the substance belongs to Christ.
We must become better at reading the law Christologically. The mistake of
many Old Covenant people could be our mistake too. We must never read or
apply these commands without reference to Christ – the One of Whom they
witness. Only when we discern the Messianic substance will we become a
trained ‘teacher of the law’ able to bring out of our storehouses both
‘new treasures as well as old’ (Matthew 13:52).
Back to other papers
|
