Question #2

[Anonymous]

I know by the way he asked this question, he is not quite on my set of tracks. Maybe my answer will show him what tracks im on. I know a lot of this was discussed in "lets be clear" thread.

2.If there is an Old Testament law that isn't ceremonial in nature (not fulfilled by Christ's life and sacrifice on the cross) and if that law is not explicitly changed or ended by something found in the New Testament, is that Old Testament law still in force for New Testament believers? Please use scripture when you answer.

Robert

 

[Anonymous]

2.If there is an Old Testament law that isn't ceremonial in nature (not fulfilled by Christ's life and sacrifice on the cross) and if that law is not explicitly changed or ended by something found in the New Testament, is that Old Testament law still in force for New Testament believers? Please use scripture when you answer.

Much depends on what your pastor means when he says "Old Testament law". If he is referring to the Mosaic law (specifically the law given to the nation of Israel at Sinai), then no element of that law is applicable to New Covenant Believers.

Hebrews 8:6-13: "But now He has obtained a more excellent service, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was constituted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. For finding fault with them, He says, "See, the days are coming," says Yahweh, "when I shall make with the house of Yisra'el and with the house of Yehudah a new covenant, not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Mitsrayim, because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them," says Yahweh. "Because this is the covenant that I shall make with the house of Yisra'el after those days", says Yahweh, "giving My laws in their mind, and I shall write them on their hearts, and I shall be their Elohim, and they shall be My people. And they shall by no means teach each one his neighbour, and each one his brother, saying, "Know Yahweh", because they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. Because I shall forgive their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawlessness I shall no longer remember. By saying, "new", He has made the first old. Now what becomes old and growing aged is near disappearing."

It is clear that a distinctly new and different covenant was going to replace the Old Mosaic Covenant given at Sinai. This would not be the same old covenant recycled, but a brand new covenant, a BETTER COVENANT, constituted on BETTER PROMISES. The first covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, was not faultless, but the fault wasn't with God's law but rather with the children of Israel. We are clearly told that the Old Covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, was growing aged and near disappearing. It was being replaced by the New Covenant, the Messianic Covenant.

Hebrews 7:11-12: "Truly, then, if perfection were through the Lewitical priesthood - for under it the people were given the Torah - why was there still need for another priest to arise according to the order of Malkitsedeq, and not be called according to the order of Aharon? For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also."

Be sure to point out to him that the Greek word here for "change" is "metatithemi", which refers to a change in one's state. It is a radical replacement of one thing for another.

In Acts 2:20, it says "the sun will be CHANGED ("metatithemi") to darkness".

In James 4:9, it says, "Let your laughter be TURNED ("metatithemi") into crying".

This isn't adding something to an existing something. This is an abolishment of one thing for another. It is taking away one thing and putting another in its place. The Levitical Priesthood was inextricably connected with the Mosaic Covenant. The Old Covenant was, by necessity, being superceded, because the priesthood was being superceded.

Hebrews 7:17-19: "for He does witness, "You are a priest forever according to the order of Malkitsedeq." For there is indeed a setting aside of the former command because of its weakness and unprofitableness, for the Torah perfected naught, but the bringing in of a better expectation, through which we draw near to Elohim."

The term "setting aside" is "athetesis", which literally means to set aside, to completely annul, to refuse to recognize its validity, or the complete removal of something. The Mosaic Covenant was done away with because it was inferior to the New Covenant.

Hebrews 8:6-7: "But now He has obtained a more excellent service, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was constituted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second."

2 Corinthians 3:5-8: "Not that we are competent in ourselves to reckon any matter as from ourselves, but our competence is from Elohim, who also made us competent as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit, for the letter kills but the Spirit gives life. But if the administering of death in letters, engraved on stones, was esteemed, so that the children of Yisra'el were unable to look steadily at the face of Mosheh because of the esteem of his face, which was passing away, how much more esteemed shall the administering of the Spirit not be?"

What are the only letters engraved on stones anywhere in all of Scripture? The Ten Commandments. Paul is going out of his way to identify these stone tablets by name as he mentions the "administering of death in letters". This isn't simply some symbol of sacrificial elements of the Mosaic Law, this is a clear, deliberate reference to the very words God wrote by His own hand on tablets of stone at Sinai.

Galatians 3:23-29: "But before belief came, we were being guarded under Torah, having been shut up for the belief about to be revealed. Therefore the Torah became our trainer unto Messiah, in order to be declared right by belief. And after belief has come, we are no longer under a trainer. For you are all sons of Elohim through belief in Messiah Yahushua. For as many of you as were immersed into Messiah have put on Messiah. There is not Yehudite nor Greek, there is not slave nor free, there is not male and female, for you are all one in Messiah Yahushua. And if you are of Messiah, then you are seed of Abraham, and heirs according to promise."

Numerous passages tell us, in no uncertain terms, that the ENTIRE MOSAIC COVENANT SYSTEM has ended. Just a few references you can discuss with him....Gal. 5:18, Rom. 7:1-7, Eph. 2:14-16, 2 Cor. 3:5-11, Rom. 3:19-20, Col. 2:13-17, Gal. 3:23-25, Rom. 10:4, Gal. 5:4, Heb. 10:1, Rom. 6:14-15, Gal. 3:10-13, Rom. 3:28...it's almost hard to read through the NT and NOT find a passage that tells us what exactly has passed away.

In his love,
David

 

[Corey]

Certainly there are laws that are moral in nature and still apply for us today. I am going to presume you will agree with these, so I will not spend an infinite amount of time proving. Seeing you have a knowledge of scripture you will acknowledge there presence in all the covenants. If we read our bibles we can see there are certain moral truths that have remained consistent. God has always hated murder, adultery, lies, and much more. This was established in Genesis, confirmed in the Law and still applies to us. Murder, adultery, lies, bearing false witness are basic fundamental morals that have never been done away or changed. These moral principals transcend covenant divide. I guess God knew what was essential for man to function as a society. Likewise marriage and family are basic fundamental building blocks of society. This also is why it transcends covenant divides. Covenants didn’t shape marriages, murder has always been murder, adultery has always been adultery, and lies have always been lies, marriage has always been marriage. I say that from genesis all the way to the apostles they understood murder, adultery and etc, the same.


The reason these moral principals are so broad in scope are because they provide necessary order for mankind to function as a society. These are laws that are absolute and objective in nature. These moral truths apply to all humanity not just Gods elect. There scope reaches to every person in space and time ( history). If murder was ever made moral and legal imagine the chaos that would take over ordered society. If adultery was ever declared moral imagine the destruction of society. Well, think about this, we still deem adultery as immoral but not illegal. Families are the bricks in the wall of society. If you bust enough bricks the wall comes crumbling down. Society is made of families and if you break enough families society crumbles. This is exactly what we see happening today. Because we have made adultery legal, families are falling apart rapidly and growing in numbers. Thus we see the wall of society crumbling because the bricks of family have been compromised. These laws were present from the beginning and have continued through all the covenants because it applies to society. They aren’t just for a specific people but to all. They aren’t to provide a distinct identity but to provide order. As you read scripture notice God provided certain moral principals in Genesis to all humanity. These were intended to provide order so that man didn’t digress to the level of animals in behavior. Now when God began to call a people out he provided laws of Identity to distinguish them from the rest of society. For many years theologians have tried to divide the law by ceremonial, civil, and moral. I will not enter this debate at this time, but I will say this, it is clear that certain laws were for identity and certain laws for order. Once one understands this it becomes clear what still applies and what does not. So it is clear in scripture that there are moral laws that apply regardless of what covenant you lived under. The ones I cited are by no means an exhaustive list only a few examples. As you read the scripture you can clearly see there continuity and that they do not fall in progressive revelations’ scope. In, conclusion we can clearly see that God provided Laws to provide order in society to all humanity. When he called his people out he then started to establish them with added laws of Identity, in order to distinguish themselves from the rest of the world. This became their national identity. Seeing we are not part of that nation the laws of identity do not apply to us. Yet we are a part of humanity so the laws that pertain to order still apply. That is why Jesus took the time to enlighten us on them and the apostles based their moral teachings on them. So we can see in the law it contains laws of order and laws of identity. If you look, the laws of order existed before the Mosaic Law but were contained in the Mosaic Law also. Likewise the New covenant used these same laws as its foundation, because of there purpose and scope. So if you look at the mosaic law, find which laws pertain to order of society as a whole and which laws pertain to national identity. In closing I will provide a few examples of both.

Moral/ order) do not murder. Established in Genesis, reaffirmed in the Mosaic law, and in the New Covenant. You can find this easily in your bible.

Identity) Dietary laws. Clearly not binding in the New covenant. Yet would be great
for health reasons.

Moral/order) Do not commit adultery. Established in the beginning, reaffirmed in the Law and the New Covenant.

Identity) Circumcision clearly is not binding in the New Testament. God clearly states this is for identity. Yet it is still a healthy practice.

I could go on and on with examples but this isn’t intended to be a theological treatise only to show examples. The laws that pertain to society as a whole to establish and preserve order have continuity through all covenants. The Laws meant to establish and preserve Israel as a nation do not apply to us. Gods’ moral law was foundational for order and using progressive revelation to change or alter rips the foundation from humanity. Maybe that is why society is crumbling, we have altered Gods foundational, absolute and objective morals meant to establish order in the name of progress. Let us affirm these foundational truths as Noah, Abraham, Moses and even Christ did in the New Covenant. All these received covenants but the same moral truths were foundational to them all. I guess we should call this foundational revelation. LOL. Now, I must admit I am a firm believer in progressive revelation. However, we must realize its scope and application and use it right. So, this is to answer a question you asked me. Are there any laws that are moral in nature and not ceremonial that still apply to us in the New Covenant. Yes, if you read you can see Jesus taught certain laws as well as Paul from the Law of Moses. These were contained in the Law but established in the beginning for the purpose of order in society as a whole. I remember when I was a student trying to figure out ceremonial, civil and moral law, wow what a confusion. LOL. Once I noticed the purpose of order and identity in the law, it harmonized the scripture like a beautiful symphony. This didn’t come from a professor I sat under; this is how I found continuity in scripture through my own work. I could be wrong, but you must admit it makes a lot of sense and is worthy of examination.

 

[CecilW]

Ooof. Lots of words. Isn't the answer pretty much found in the question? Especially when God Himself says, "I never change"?

 

[Mark C]

Agreed, Cecil. After all, if we won't believe the Savior Himself when He said that "not one yod or tiddle" will pass from His Torah so long as "heaven and earth" still exist, why twist Scripture any further?

 

[welltan]

There is nothing wrong with keeping parts of the Law for personal behavior and health. However burdening other Christians with the Law in demanding that it be kept is in opposition to Christ fulfilling the Law. If Christ fulfilled then we do not have to nor do other Christians. What part of the word "finished" that Christ spoke on the Cross do we not understand? What did he finish? He finished nothing for those that insist on the Law being kept. Insisting on the Law is against Christ's mission and life and death and resurrection. He walked the dusty streets of Jerusalem and surrounding area as a perfect witness of his own fulfillment and establishment of the Law so that He might be the perfect sacrifice. Why would Christians walk away from the Cross and try to attain perfection in the Law rather than perfection through Christ and Christ's blood.
The Law includes animal sacrifice. Torah keepers without animal sacrifice are not Torah keepers but partial Torah keepers. Torah keepers with animal sacrifice (and I hope there are none here) mix or would mix the blood of animals with the blood of Christ on the cross (God forbid!) and this is against Christ and more akin to Judaizers at the least. And at the most, the idea of mixing the blood of Christ with the blood of animals makes me shudder and should make one look to Heaven in fear of the God who said "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased" Where in the O.T. did he say this is my beloved goat before a sacrifice. Christians can be Christ-like but they can not be Christ. (Christ was perfection and in all ways found without sin) A Christian without Christ is not a Christian. What should happen then? Should Christ return again and seeing that the Law is again being attempted with failure again, that Christ again be sacrificed? No, if Christ's sacrifice is walked away (or fallen away) from and many fallen back into their own sin and attempt to purify themselves, then there remains no more perfect sacrifice which was Christ and Christ's sacrifice is of no avail. Now that is scary to me. I like being covered by Christ's blood and Christ's holiness extended to me. If Christ and the Father are one then anyone trying to be their own Christ is attempting to climb up some other way than through Christ and what Christ did.

No goats in my salvation. Thank you Jesus.

 

[Mark C]

What part of the word "finished" that Christ spoke on the Cross do we not understand? ...

No offense, but there is MUCH more to that word than most churches teach. Much like the word "perfect", which is also misunderstood -- and for similar reasons -- it does NOT mean "done away with", but complete, fulfilled, and filled up with understanding.


Speaking just for myself, I choose to obey Him because I love Him -- and that is my "reasonable service".


Blessings,
Mark