Posts
A law stays in
effect until it is annulled, replaced, or its time-limit or restriction has
been fulfilled. All laws are not equal and not all reveal the same thing. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you
hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill, and cumin. But you have
neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy, and
faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the
former (Matt 23:23 NIV). The moral law reveals the holy nature of God
and does not change. You shall be holy, for I Yahveh your
God am holy (Lev. 19:1); You shall thus observe all
My statutes and all My ordinances and do them; I am Yahveh (Lev. 19:37). Also
see 1 Peter 1:14-16 and Acts 14:15.
There were
specific Hebrew terms for this category of law, namely the moral law. The main term
is mitsvah, usually translated as
‘commandment’ in English. You have heard of this term before. At a Bar-mitsvah,
a 13-year-old boy becomes a son of the commandments in Judaism. The Ten
Commandments are the foundation for this moral law (Eph 6:1-4), often called
the “ten words” or the “testimony,” but many other moral laws give more clarity
beyond the foundational and overarching Ten Commandments. The 10 words instruct
us on the larger categories and show what loving God (1-4) and loving our neighbor
(5-10) looks like (Matt 22:37-40; Rom 13:8-10). But these 10 Words are broad umbrella
like commands and the additional moral laws in the Torah provide more specifics
for human obedience. For instance, both homosexual relations (Lev 18:22) and
bestiality (Exod 22:19) are a violation of the overarching foundational moral
law, ‘Do not commit adultery’ (Exod 20:14; Matt 19:18-19). [1]
The additional moral laws clarify what God hates and what holiness looks like,
as well as what paganism looks like. If one loves God, that person will obey
Him (Mark 12:28-34; John 14:15; Deut 11:1).
However, in the
middle of the Ten Commandments is the 4th commandment that has both
moral and ceremonial aspects (Exod 20:8-11). Understanding the Sabbath
regulations is a difficult study and takes years of work to come to a solid
conclusion. Historical Theology is only partially helpful in this matter
because of the diversity of interpretations for the last 2,000 years. The ceremonial
part of the fourth commandment concerns the day of the week (Matt 12:10-12; Luke
13:14-15) and is a sign for Israel (Exod 31:12-17). Saturday commemorates both
the six 24-hour-day creation week and the redemption of Israel from Egypt’s
brutal slavery (Deut 5:15). They observed the Sabbath prior to receiving the
law (Exod 16:23-29; also see Gen 3:8-11, 4:3, 26:5; Mark 2:27-28) and it is described
in the law (Deut 5:13-15; Exod 20:8). However, Jesus arose on the first day of
the week and for forty-days repeatedly met with the disciples on the first day
of the week (John 20:1, 19-29; Luke 24:21-45). This New Covenant redemptive act
in redemptive history was greater than the redemption of the Jews from Egypt (a
type of the Suffer Servant’s redemption, see Isaiah 53). Thus, a change of day
was in order just like the change in the covenantal sign of circumcision to
baptism (Col 2:11-14) and the replacement of the Passover with the Lord’s
supper (Mark 14:16-26). So, the moral part of this commandment continues
forward, but the ceremonial part does not. We each must decide individually how
to handle the day of worship and determine which day to honor each week (Rom
14:5-6). However, our conclusion on obeying this part of the 4th
commandment cannot be made binding on another believer’s conscience according to
the New Testament (Col 2:16). The three moral aspects of the 4th
commandment that are repeated and applied to Christians are the requirements to
work, to worship, and to rest (This is also the view of G. Campbell Morgan and
close to Augustine’s position). However, ‘rest’ in the New Covenant takes on a salvific
(Matt 11:28-30) and eschatological application (Heb 4:9). Trusting or believing
in Jesus and the Word of God produces new covenant rest, and we are commanded
to do it (1 John 3:23 and Heb 3:11-4:11). Unlike the other nine commandments, the
whole fourth commandment is not repeated in the New Testament and not applied
to the church. Likewise, the ceremonial part is annulled in the New Testament
by both practice and command (Acts 15:5-32, 20:7; 1 Cor 16:1-2, Rom 14:5-6; Col
2:16; Gal 4:9-12). But the three moral parts of this command that are repeated (work,
worship, rest) and not repealed in the New Testament are binding on the church
(1 Thes 3:10; Heb 10:23-27; Mark 6:31; Heb 3:7-19). However, Saturday worship
(contra Seventh Day Adventist) or Sunday Christian Sabbath rules (contra Thomas
Boston) are not required for believers today. However, worshipping on Saturday
or following Sunday Christian Sabbath rules are not individually forbidden, and
the latter provided much good for the Puritans of old and their godly descendants.
The Lord’s Day (Rev 1:10) Sunday worship is important, and it is wonderful to
use the day for Bible study, worship and acts of mercy. But the New Testament
would not support exercising Church discipline on a believer who picked apples
or jogged on a Sunday.
I must admit I
wish this issue was simpler to resolve and that John Chrysostom, Augustine, Martin
Luther, John Calvin, and John Owen all agreed on this matter (Historical
Theology). It would have even helped to have an ancient council to clarify a doctrine
of the Lord’s Day. I do not take it lightly that what I just wrote is not in
full conformity to the Westminster Confession of Faith and the 1689 Baptist
Confession of Faith. I decided not to re-enlist in the Navy Seabee Reserves after
serving 6-years, 10-months in 1986 based on my earlier influence of these
documents. Today I would have a lifetime monthly pension and temporary medical
care benefits if I had re-enlisted and completed the additional 13-years.
Likewise, when I was applying to be a Navy Chaplain in 2001, it would have
helped my application if I was currently in a Reserve unit or had already completed
my 20-years when I graduated with the required M-Div. in 2004. I do not want to
be aligned only with the theology of modern evangelicals, but deeply desire
continuity with orthodox believers from past centuries. Thus, I would prefer to
be able to affirm fully every article of a historical confession, but after
studying this issue for years, I have some reservations. Do note that the
American version of the Westminster Confession has omitted the section on
identifying the Anti-Christ, so the PCA was not above accepting a modified version
missing one section of the original Westminster Confession. Furthermore, it is
fine for anyone to limit Sunday activity to ministries of the word, works of
mercy, corporate worship, Bible study, and even physical rest. Do note that when I taught
Sunday School and preached twice on Sunday, it was hard work, and I was
exhausted on Monday. The Levites who hauled wood and
water to the temple on Saturday and the priests who sacrificed the animals were
required to work on the Sabbath but were not guilty of sin.
Where historical theology is
helpful is when a new teaching suddenly arises. New theological and
doctrinal understandings that show-up after the 1800s are a problem. Unless the
new views are based on recent archaeological findings or comparative language
word studies previously not available to help with biblical terms that are only
used once in the Bible (hapax legomenon), they are suspect at best,
dangerous at worst. There are some rare discoveries that clarify a text we may
have misunderstood, but these are the exception and not the rule. It takes an
enormous amount of pride to think that you are the first one to get a doctrine
right in over 2,000-years when Christ’s best gifted men to the church have
already lived and recorded their research for us.
Most of the civil laws of the nation of Israel
have a moral law principle that undergirds them. But they are, in essence, a
culture and time-frozen application of those principles. Likewise, some civil
laws reflect the mercy of God and restrict some humans while protecting others.
The slavery (Deut 15:12) and divorce laws (Deut 24:1-4) fall into this
category. Neither of these human actions mirror the holiness of God, but God,
in grace and mercy, puts in protection for the weaker party living in a fallen
world with these civil law restrictions. The time-frozen national restriction
of Israel’s civil laws, called misphpatim,
does not directly and exactly apply to the Christian in a wooden strict fashion.
However, the moral principles that undergird these laws do still apply to the New
Covenant believer. For example, observe Paul using this method by comparing Deut
25:4, 1 Cor 9:8-11, and 1 Tim 5:18. [2]
These civil laws require thinking, studying, and prayer to discern the
underlying moral principle that applies to Christians in every culture and in every
time period (See Matt 18:16; Luke 3:8-12, 10:26-28, 20:27-39; Acts 3:22-23,
23:4-5; Rom 9:15-17, 10:5-13, 19:19, 11:8, 12:19-21, 15:10; 1 Cor 5:13, 10:6-13;
2 Cor 6:16-18, 8:13-15, 13:1-3; Gal 3:10-14, 5:14; 1 Tim 2:19; Heb 3:4-6, 7-11,
8:3-6, 9:11-14, 18-28, 10:30-31, 12:18-24, 13:6; 1 Pet 2:9; and Rev 1:6). This
is not an easy task to complete, and we can make mistakes using our best
efforts. Likewise, the application in 1604 AD in Spain will differ from the
application in Australia in 2024.
Should the
Corinthians pay their pastors? Paul says yes, based on the civil law of Israel.
Must westerners with a sloped an A-frame roof build a rail around that roof to
obey the Bible (Deut 22:8)? No. However, the principle of providing safety in
the home for guests does apply to them and the modern necessity of installing rails
on steps and decks is for this same purpose. This is how you love your neighbor
as yourself (Matt 22:39 and Jam 1:8).
The ceremonial
laws (Hoq, Huqqah) governed old covenant
worship, which had many temporary types pointing to Jesus the Messiah (Col
2:13-17; Heb 9:1-28) along with the purity laws that were given to make God’s
people distinct, separated, and to develop a mind-set of distinction
(antithetical thinking) in the Jewish people as an example to the pagan world
(Exod 8:17-19, 21-24, 9:4, 11:7; Lev 10:8-11, 11:47, 18:3, 26-27, 20:25-26;
Deut 14:1-21; Gal 3:24-26). The Jew went through the fields each day making
mental distinctions. That animal is clean, and that animal is unclean. He
developed a worldview in which everything was not a shade of grey. Some things
were white, and some things were black. Thus, the Jews not only looked
different to the pagans around them, but they also thought differently from the
pagans did because of the worship and purity laws. Separation is for the
purpose of evangelism, is helpful for fighting the sin of compromise, and for
preserving a culture and bloodline, but these types of rules were not everlasting
moral principles that could not be set aside under any circumstances (Deut
7:1-16). The Jews were isolated as the particular people of God. Why was this
the case? They alone had the Mosaic covenant promises, they alone had the
special revelation of God (OT), and they alone provided the bloodline of the
coming Messiah (Abraham>Jacob>David; Rom 1:3). These temporary rules made
them distinct, protected, isolated, and harder to be assimilated into pagan
culture. Satan’s numerous attempts to do this failed, including his efforts
through Antiochus Epiphanes (Num 25:6-9; Exod 1:22; Est 3:8-11; Dan 8:8-14).
But once the Messiah had arrived, and the Scriptures had been preserved and
translated along with the Jewish culture and bloodline had all been preserved,
these rules had served their temporary purpose. They were set aside so the
focus could be on the Great Commission of discipling all the ethnic groups on
the earth in their own culture rather than making them Jews first. After the Messiah
started building His church, the purity rules would work against that goal
instead of promoting it (Matt 16:18; Acts 1-2, 8-10, 15; Rom 14:5-6; 1 Cor 10:30-31;
Gal 3:23-29; Eph 2:11-22; Col 2:16-23).
And these purity laws were clearly not the most
important regulations in the Old Testament cannon (Tanak)—contra the
Pharisees. Not eating a rabbit or some shrimp made the Jew different from the
pagans around them, but not morally superior by these abstentions. Separation,
isolation, and distinction are the foundations of many of the purity laws
rather than morality. For instance, one not eating pork while killing babies
does not cancel out the moral violation, and these laws were never equal (I visited
a doctor once in NY state who ate Kosher but also insisted that we abort our
son because he had a heart problem and other physical weaknesses). Even more to
the point, the old covenant worship regulations were fulfilled and replaced
with the new covenant worship regulations (Jer 31:31-34; Heb 9:1-10:31, 13:9;
Gal 5:1-14; Col 2:9-12; 1 Tim 4:1-6). Nevertheless, much can still be learned
from the principles behind even the sacrificial regulations that gives types
and insights about the Messiah earthly ministry and His finished cross-work. Furthermore,
Jesus annulled the purity laws given to make the Jews distinct from the Gentiles
because these now work counter to the gospel (See Acts 10 and 15). The LORD’s
judgment on the temple in Jerusalem in 70AD (Luke 21:20-22) completely ended
the Jews ability to keep the sacrificial laws in Israel, just like God tearing
the curtain in front of the Holy of Holies from the top to the bottom (Matt
27:51) made it clear there was a change with the worship regulations now that
the final sacrifice had been made by the Messiah Himself (Eph 5:2). Even in the
old covenant period, the laws to make Israel distinct were to be set aside if
they conflicted with a moral law (See Jesus’ affirmation of this in Matt 12:1-8).
It would have been a greater sin, not preserving human life,[3]
which is the positive aspect of the command against murder, by refusing to feed
David and his men with bread only allowed for the priest’s family—a ceremonial,
purity rule). The moral laws are the heavy ones [most important], the
ceremonial are the light ones [least important] (Matt 23:23). The legalists
always major on the minors and reverse God’s order of priority. Jesus reminds
the Scribes and Pharisees of this error repeatedly (See an example in Matt
23:24).
Some take Paul’s
arguments against the Judaizers that were making the ceremonial ritual of circumcision
as a requirement for salvation as his rejection of the entire Old Testament law
(Gal 5). Of course, the continuity and discontinuity issue has been debated for
many years especially after dispensationalism arose in the late 1800s. But
anti-nomianism dates back much further than this as Martin Luther had to
address it in his day. This is not a careful handling of the New Testament. Long
after Pentecost and the inauguration of Christ’s administration of the New
Covenant Paul applies the Ten Commandments to Gentile Christians (Eph 6:1-2,
Rom 13:8-10). And don’t forget, long after Pentecost the Holy Spirit used the
10th commandment against coveting to convince Paul he was a sinner
and needed to embrace the glorious Lord that appeared to him on the road north
to Damascus, Syria for salvation from sins power and punishment (Rom 7:7-8).
So, can a new
covenant believer eat bacon even though refraining from it made the Jews
distinct from the pagan nations around them and immigrants from those nations
visiting them? Yes, Jesus annulled these laws for the church (Mark 7:19; Acts
10:9-20; 1 Tim 4:1-8). So, is it okay now for a farmer to rape one of his sheep
now we are in the New Covenant era? No. The moral laws in the Old Testament on
bestiality, even though they are not repeated in the New Testament, have not
been annulled, replaced, or fulfilled in time. God still hates this practice. However,
eating catfish is not something God hates, but not eating them was a rule given
to the Jews to make them different from the other people groups around them.
The laws
concerning cross-dressing as a different gender than the one a human received
as designed by genetics and displayed at birth by gender specific body parts
are still binding no matter what the culture says (Deut 22:5). Killing babies
in the womb is still sin even though over 50% of Americans approve of it in
2023 (Exod 21:22-25). In 1950, less than 1% of Americans approved of the
practice. It is the covenantal administration which determines what is binding
on the people of God, not the changing culture. Liberal antinomian’s appeal to
the ceremonial-worship-purity-diet laws of the Jews having a time-date
fulfillment as justification for violating moral laws regarding sexual immorality
has no logical, exegetical, lexical, theological, or biblical basis. The new
covenant administration and its documents (the NT) under Jesus (rather than
Moses, the prior covenant administrator) also condemn their preferred sins
along with many other sins that different groups of people prefer (See 1 Cor 6:9-11;
Rom 1:16-32; Eph 5:1-21; 1 Tim 1:8-11). They cannot make a case for their
behavior by proper exegesis and application of the Bible. The Political Left movement
is aware of this and has started burning Bibles and silencing and jailing
Christians. Like in the Roman world of the first century, this is just the
beginning. They must force compromise or annihilate us to win. They have taken
the first steps on social media and even controlling credit and money to block
any who hold to different views than theirs. With one back-room decision, they
can make a thriving business that is not politically correct to need to file
for bankruptcy in weeks. Through leftist EID polices, believers can be removed
from positions of employment for failure to celebrate the lifestyle choices that
conflict with the Word God. It is no longer enough for the leftist movement that
we love, befriend, are kind to, and show tolerance towards individual pagans that
we expect to act like pagans as they live out their worldview and bend to their
culture. The expectation is now to go beyond caring for the individual to
celebrating their addictions and behaviors that are affirmed by leftist political
advocates. This is a compromise we cannot make. We must stand firm on the Word
of God like the first century Christians who would not offer worship to Caesar.
They were asked just once each year to declare Ceasar is Lord and burn incense
to him in worship. They died by the thousands for refusing to do this. Also
remember Daniel who would not stop praying when it was illegal as well as he
Apostles who would not stop preaching in Jesus’ name, in defiance of the
Sanhedrin’s official order. (We must obey God rather than men.) We could even
add the Hebrew families and mid-wives that would not kill the male babies in
direct defiance of the binding legal order of Pharoah. God has designed the institutions
of the family, the state, the church as equal institutions under Christ’s
Lordship and under the authority of the Bible. These three are not in hierarchical
order. Whenever the State asks the believer to do or not do something that Scripture
has put under the domain of the family or the church, or has made clear in its
teaching, it is the believer’s duty to courageously defy the State and accept
the consequences like the three Hebrew young men in the book of Daniel (They
would not bow, bend, or burn). Caesar is not Lord of the Church. Jesus the
Messiah is the only Lord of the Church. The State is over taxes and has the
authority to set rules to protect citizens, like traffic rules and the consequences
when these laws as well as when moral laws are violated. But it does not have
the authority to demand someone celebrate and encourage mutilating children who
have been deceived by the education system and the culture about their gender. It
does not have the authority to tell the Church that it cannot gather or cannot
sing once they gather. When the State does these things, it has left its domain
of authority under God and it is thus a sin to comply to its demands when its
regulations are the opposite of the Bible [See David Martin Lloyd-Jones, Commentary
on Romans 13].
Without divine intervention, the Left will win this battle. I have bad news, though, for my liberal neighbors. They will not win the war. Their persecution will come to an end and be reviewed on the Day of Judgment, which will increase their everlasting punishment. And this is a sure thing.
And the King will answer them, “Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.” (Matt. 25:40 ESV)
Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven shone around him. 4 And falling to the ground, he heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” 5 And he said, "Who are you, Lord?" And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.” (Acts 9:3-5 ESV)
The seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven saying: The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Messiah, and He will reign forever and ever! (Rev 11:15 HCSB)
Then I saw a great white throne and
him who was seated on it. From his presence earth and sky fled away, and no
place was found for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small,
standing before the throne, and books were opened. Then another book was
opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written
in the books, according to what they had done. (Rev. 20:11-12 ESV)
By Rev. Ted D. Manby, Th.M., USA 2023
[1] This law can also be broken to a lesser degree with
lesser damage and consequences in one’s inner man by lusting for one that is
not your spouse. Jesus said, But I say to you that everyone who
looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in
his heart (Matt 5:28 ESV). Unmortified lusts can become the full acts of rebellion, with all the
consequences and damage done. The 10th commandment on coveting clarifies
that these laws are broken first in the human heart long before the physical
actions occur, and that mere outward physical compliance is not fully keeping
the law.
[2] Paul writes: Do I say these things on
human authority? Does not the Law say the same? 9 For it is written
in the Law of Moses, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the
grain." Is it for oxen that God is concerned? 10 Does he not
certainly speak for our sake? It was written for our sake, because the plowman
should plow in hope and the thresher thresh in hope of sharing in the crop.11
If we have sown spiritual things among you, is it too much if we reap material
things from you? (1 Cor 9:8-11 ESV) Also see 1 Cor 10:1-11.
[3] Each of the Ten Commands has a positive command built into
it, as well as a negative prohibition for the command to be kept. Not only is
one to not take a human life in anger, but he/she is also to preserve human
life in love. It is not enough to refrain from lying. You must also speak the
truth when it is needed.
