davidbu@tekigm2.men.tek.com (David Buxton) (09/29/89)
Let's take a closer look at the ceremonial ordinances that Moses wrote in the book. They were to repose in the "side of the ark . . . for a WITNESS AGAINST THEE." It is interesting to note that the curses and judgments of this law spelled out penalties for transgression which were totally missing from the ten commandments. For this reason, the ceremonial law was con- sidered to be a law which was "against" them. Even in the New Testament we read the same descriptive language in reference to that law. "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross" (Col. 2:14). Certainly there was nothing in the ten-commandment law that could be defined as "contrary" to Paul and the church to whom he was writing. It was not "against" those early Christians to refrain from adultery, theft, lying, etc. On the other hand, that moral law was a tremendous protection to them and favored every interest in their lives. We have only to read Paul's exalted description of the ten-commandment law to recognize that those eternal principles were never blotted out or nailed to the cross. After quoting the tenth commandment of the decalogue in Romans 7:7, Paul wrote these words, "Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good" (verse 12). Then he continued in verse 14, "For we know that the law is spiritual . . . " If the ten-commandment law had been blotted out at the cross, would Paul have spoken in such glowing language of its perfection and spirituality? He did not speak of a past law. He said, "the law IS holy . . . . the law IS spiritual." In other words, it was very much alive and operating when Paul wrote to the Roman church. In contrast he described the handwriting of ordinances in the past tense: "WAS against us . . . WAS contrary to us." It is certain he was not speaking of the same law. One was present and one was past. Interestingly enough, Paul spoke of the fifth commandment as being in effect when he wrote to the Ephesians. "Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. Honor thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth" (Ephesians 6:1-3). Again, we find the great apos- tle affirming that this commandment "IS," not "WAS." Had it been a part of the ordinances described by the same writer in Colossians, he would have said, "It WAS the first commandment with promise." In the New Testament Church there was a lot of contention over the subject of circumcision, which was a major requirement of the ceremonial law. In Acts 15:5 we read, "But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to com- mand them to keep the law of Moses." As we all recognize, this could not be referring in any sense to the ten commandments. They do not even mention circumcision. Yet Paul declared, "Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God" (1 Cor. 7:19). If the law dealing with circumci- sion was now NOTHING (abolished), then what "commandments" was he exalting as being still binding? The moral law remained, while the law of circumcision (ceremonial law) was abolished. The truth is that there are numerous references in the Bible which prove that the law of types and shadows, because of its temporary application, was never considered on an equality with the eternal moral law. Its system of sacrifices, human priesthood and feast days were instituted after sin entered the world and alway pointed forward to the deliverance from sin which would be wrought through the true Lamb and Priest who was to come-- Jesus. The writer of Hebrews spends much time proving that the law of the Leviti- cal priesthood would have to change in order to accommodate the priesthood of Jesus. He did not spring from the tribe of Levi, but from the tribe of Judah. Therefore, we have reference to Jesus "Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life" (Heb. 7:12,16). This "carnal commandment" dealing with a human priesthood is found in the hand written law of Moses. It contrasts sharply with Paul's description of the ten commandments as "spiritual" and "holy" and "good." Nothing could be carnal and spiritual at the same time. Neither could anything be "good" and "not good" at the same time. Yet in Ezekiel we read these words: "Because they . . . had polluted my Sabbaths, and their eyes were after their father's idols. Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live" (Eze. 20:24,25). Observe carefully how the prophet identifies the Sabbath law, and then immediately says, "I gave them ALSO statutes that were not good." Keep in mind that the ten commandments were called "holy, and just, and good" (Rom. 7:12). Because of its curses and judgments against their continual disobedience, the law of Moses was "against" them and was "not good." Adapted from a pockett book by Joe Crews of Amazing Facts. P.O. Box 680 Frederick, Md. 21701 Dave