Does the Mosaic Law (ML) kill or does it give life? Is it “against
us” (Col. 2:14) or is it for us? Dr. Daniel Botkin argues that the law is good
and, therefore, there is no need for its repeal:
·
According to this misinterpretation, God’s Law
was “against us,” and “contrary to us” because it was a heavy yoke of bondage.
It was an impediment, a hindrance to man’s attempt to be reconciled to God.
Therefore, God had to “take it out of the way” and get rid of it. He did this
by nailing it to the Cross… This view is flawed for a few different reasons.
First, it contradicts the biblical truth that God’s Law, properly understood,
is neither “against us” nor “contrary to us.” According to the Bible, God’s
unadulterated Law is a blessing, not a burden. (See, e.g., Deut. 4:5-9; Psalm
19, Psalm 119, Romans 7:22, 1 Tim. 1:8, and many other passages.) (Gates of Eden)
Botkin is correct to point out that the ML is good. Paul
says as much:
·
So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is
holy, righteous and good. (Rom. 7:12)
However, right before this, Paul declares that the ML also produces sin, deception, and death:
·
What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful?
Certainly not! Nevertheless, I would not have known what sin was had it not
been for the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the
law had not said, “You shall not covet.” But sin, seizing the opportunity
afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of coveting. For apart
from the law, sin was dead. Once I was alive apart from the law; but when the
commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. I found that the very
commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. For sin,
seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through
the commandment put me to death. (Romans 7:7-11)
How then is it possible that the “law is holy… righteous and
good,” and yet its effects are so damning? Paul explained that the ML made
Israel aware of its sin (death) and, consequently, their need for the mercy and
forgiveness of God (life):
·
Now we know that whatever the law says, it says
to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the
whole world held accountable to God. Therefore no one will be declared
righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we
become conscious of our sin. (Romans 3:19-20)
The ML humbles and silences our arrogance. It shows us what
we are really all about, and it’s not pretty. Instead of directly imparting life, the law shows us our damning sin (Rom.
6:23) and our need for God’s mercy, where we find life.
The Temple symbolized Israel’s need for mercy. Every day,
sacrifices were made for the sins of Israel. This communicated that their level
of obedience would never be good enough. Instead, any one sin would place them
under a course:
·
“Cursed is anyone who does not uphold the words
of this law by carrying them out.” Then all the people shall say, “Amen!”
(Deut. 27:26)
However damning this truth is, it is also life-giving:
·
For all who rely on the works of the law are
under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to
do everything written in the Book of the Law.” Clearly no one who relies on the
law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.” The
law is not based on faith; on the contrary, it says, “The person who does these
things will live by them.” Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by
becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on
a pole.” (Galatians 3:10-13)
The curse of the law can bring us to Christ. Paul argued
that the ultimate goodness of the ML was found in its ability to lead us to the
mercy of God through the Messiah:
·
So the law was our guardian until Christ came
that we might be justified by faith. Now that this faith has come, we are no
longer under a guardian [the law]. (Gal. 3:24-25)
However, Botkin seems to deny that the ML kills in order to
lead us to grace:
·
God’s unadulterated Law does not put people in
bondage; it liberates. “So shall I keep Thy Law continually forever and ever.
And I will walk at liberty” (Psalm 119:44f). God wants us to keep His
commandments.
In a limited sense, Botkin is
correct. The law does “liberate,” but it only
gave Israel a taste of the coming liberation to which the law pointed – Christ!
While there was a type of “forgiveness” under the law, it never was able to
open the door to the Presence of God. The Holy Place remained guarded, the
blood offerings were a daily reminder that Israel was still in their sins, and
their conscience remained uncleansed. Fullness could only come with the Cross:
·
How much more, then, will the blood of Christ,
who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse
our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the
living God! For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that
those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he
has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the
first covenant. (Hebrews 9:14-15)
A true forgiveness and cleansing could only come from the
Messiah. Nevertheless, Israel had experienced a foretaste of the promised grace
through the Temple. However, they could not come boldly before God with a pure
conscience. Consequently, Boykin overstates the “liberty” experienced under the
law.
Botkin would agree with much of this. However, he would still
maintain that even though we are saved through the mercy of God at the Cross,
we are still under the ML. Boykin
therefore denies that Jesus had fulfilled the ML on the Cross:
·
Jesus said we are not to even think that He came
to abolish the Law. (See Matthew 5:17-19.)
However, Boykin leaves much out of his equation. Jesus had
taught:
·
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the
Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
For truly I tell you, until heaven and
earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will
by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands [before they
are fulfilled] and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the
kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be
called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:17-19)
Admittedly, this teaching is cryptic. Jesus didn’t explicitly teach, “I am bringing in a
New Covenant that will replace the Mosaic.” Why not? Israel wasn’t ready to
hear this. In their minds, such teaching was a capital offense, which would
have brought immediate stoning.
In fact, Jesus never explicitly
taught against the ML. However, He hadn’t been explicit about many other things – His Deity, His
Messiah-ship, the New Covenant, or His Atonement. It was only at the end that
He taught more explicitly about His mission. About His being the Messiah, Quoting
two Messianic passages, He only revealed Himself to the leadership at the end
in order to help them put Him to death:
·
“Tell us if you are the Christ…” Jesus said to
him, "It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will
see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the
clouds of heaven." (Matthew 26:63-64)
Although He had been cryptic, Jesus was nevertheless preparing
His followers for the coming New Covenant, which would replace the Old. He
radically proclaimed that He was greater than the Temple and the Sabbath (Mat. 12:6-8).
Loving God was no longer a matter of keeping the ML but His commandments (John 14:15; 21-24). The way to the Father was no
longer though Moses but through Him
(John 14:6). Israel’s faith would now have to be placed in Jesus (John 8:24) as the only way to the Father. They were no
longer to be cleansed by the offering of animals but through His Word (John 15:3).
He set the stage for the passing of the ML in other ways. Under, the ML, Israel
was defiled by coming in contact with external pollutants. However, Jesus cryptically
contradicted this:
·
"Listen to me, everyone, and understand
this. Nothing outside a man can make him 'unclean' by going into him. Rather,
it is what comes out of a man that makes him 'unclean’...Don't you see that
nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'? For it
doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body."
(In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean") (Mark 7:14-19; NIV).
It was Mark who brought out the fact that Jesus, in effect,
had “declared all foods ‘clean.’" Only in the end did Jesus make mention
of the New Covenant, which His blood would bring (Mat. 26:28; Mark 14:24).
Although He didn’t explicitly mention that this New Covenant
would replace the Mosaic, this was clearly His meaning. When He sent out His
disciples (the Great Commission), He didn’t mention a word about their
spreading the teachings of Moses. Instead:
·
“Go therefore and make disciples of all the
nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the
Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and
lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Mat. 28:19-20).
Jesus left it to His Apostles to teach about the complete fulfillment
and replacement of the Mosaic Covenant by the New, which they did with all
clarity:
·
Therefore, my brethren, you also have become
dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you may be married to
another--to Him who was raised from the dead, that we should bear fruit to God.
For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the
law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death. But now we have been
delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should
serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter [of the
law]. (Romans 7:4-6)
There is no suggestion in any of these replacement verses
that Christ had only fulfilled part of the Old Covenant. Instead, when
we died to the Law, we died to it entirely.
According to Paul, only complete freedom from the Old would enable us to be exclusively under Christ.
While I am quite certain that Boykin would not have us
reconstruct the Temple in order to return to the animal sacrificial system, he
nevertheless claims that we are under the law of Moses. Would he claim that we
are only under part of this covenant because Christ only fulfilled part and not all? If so, such a
distinction is not scripturally supportable. If Christ fulfilled the covenant
of the law, He fulfilled it entirely or not at all. This is the message of
Scripture.
Jeremiah tells us that the New Covenant would be distinct
from the failed Old Covenant:
·
"Behold, the days are coming, says the
LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the
house of Judah-- not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers
in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt,
My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the LORD. But
this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those
days, says the LORD: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their
hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. No more shall
every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the
LORD,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of
them, says the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will
remember no more." (Jeremiah 31:31-34)
The Old Covenant is no longer in sight (Jer. 3:14-16),
consistent with Apostolic revelation:
·
By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the
first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon
disappear. (Hebrews 8:13)
·
First he said, “Sacrifices and offerings, burnt
offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with
them”—though they were offered in accordance with the law. Then he said, “Here
I am, I have come to do your will.” He sets aside the first to establish
the second. (Hebrews 10:8-9)
Scripture gives no hint that Christ only fulfilled part of the ML and covenant. However,
does this mean that the ML is no longer instructive or valid for Christian
living? Not at all! Instead, Paul declared that we have to uphold the requirements
of the law (Romans 3:31)!
Murder is still murder; adultery is still a sin. The moral
essence of the law is affirmed by the New Testament and therefore mandatory.
However, much of the law is not a matter of substance but of the shadows cast
by the Messiah. Therefore, now we embrace the Messiah and not the shadows He had cast:
·
Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what
you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration
or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the
reality, however, is found in Christ. (Colossians 2:16-17)
Although we are no longer under the law, the law still
conveys the vital truths of God. However, how do we distinguish substance from
shadow? By understanding the Bible Christo-centrically!
Botkin is unclear whether he thinks that the Old Covenant
applies only to Jewish believers in Christ. The Jerusalem Council had decided
conclusively that the Gentile believer did not have to become circumcised to
become a Jew and to follow the ML (Acts 15). Sadly, some Jewish believers erroneously
believe that the Jews are still under the law.
This creates the kind of division within the Body of Christ
that Paul had taught against. He openly criticized Peter for drawing back from
fellowship with Gentile believers when the Jewish believers arrived. Why?
Because Peter had betrayed “the truth of the Gospel” (Galatians 2:14)! Instead,
the Gospel requires unity of all believers:
·
Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit
through the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were
called to one hope when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and
through all and in all. (Ephesians 4:3-5)
Without unity, we will not be able to impact this world as
Jesus had prayed:
·
“My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also
for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be
one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so
that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the
glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— I in them and you in me—so that they may be
brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and
have loved them even as you have loved me. (John 17:20-23)
Let us therefore pray for unity as Jesus had!
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)