Bishop's Epistle: CHRISTIANITY AND THE SEVENTH DAY SABBATH, Chapter Two, "The Relationship Of The Ten Commandments With The Mosaic Law"

The Relationship of the Ten Commandments With the Mosaic Law

Here, we must consider the relationship of the Ten Commandments (the Decalogue) to the Mosaic Law. (Of course, the terms “Mosaic Law” and “Mosaic Covenant” are synonymous and may be used interchangeably in this writing.) This part of our investigation is important because it is argued that since the Ten Commandments reflect the Moral Law of God, they remain in effect in the Church. We often hear the mantra: “Nothing passes the Cross except the Decalogue.” If this is true the command to keep the seventh day Sabbath remains in effect.

It is often posited that the Mosaic Law is divided into three parts: moral law, ceremonial law and civil law. It is, then, asserted that the first remains in effect while the last two (civil and ceremonial law) are abolished by the cross. While the dissecting of the Law of Moses into three parts helps the Bible student to arrange the Law of Moses into categories, this labeling is nowhere suggested in Holy Scripture and creates a false dichotomy when representing what was abolished by the cross and what is to be retained by the Lord’s church. The truth is: All has been abolished; Nothing has been retained.

The Law of Moses is a unitary corpus and was never fragmented into various parts, but was always viewed as one cohesive, unified whole. One had to keep all the commandments of the Law to receive of its benefits (Galatians 3:10-12). Moses said, "Cursed be he that does not confirm all the words of this law to do them" (Deuteronomy 27:26). The Lord said through Jeremiah, "Cursed be the man that obeys not the words of this covenant, ...Obey my voice, and do them, according to all which I command you" (Jeremiah 11:3-4; see also Galatians 3:10). James, our Lord’s half brother, summed it up best when he said, "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10; See also v. 11). To break a “ceremonial” law was viewed to be the same offense as breaking a “moral” law. Perfect obedience was demanded to all the commands of the covenant, because it was a unified whole.

Seeing that the Ten Commandments are the platform for the 613 commandments of the Mosaic Law (the Hebrews had enlarged upon the Ten Commandments to arrive at a list of 613 laws), and arguably the very heart of the Mosaic Covenant, they too were abolished at Calvary.

Dead To The Law Includes Death To The Decalogue

Does being “dead to the law” mean being dead to the Ten Commandments, as well? Paul settles this question in his letter to the Romans. To the Romans Paul identifies the Decalogue as included in the “law” to which Christians are dead by virtue of the death and resurrection of Christ Jesus. He does it by quoting the last of the Ten Commandments, showing that followers of Christ are delivered from these particular ordinances: “Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. 5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. 6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. 7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.” —Romans 7:4-7

Paul’s letter to the Corinthians included the same admonition concerning the Ten Commandments: “Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was make glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.. For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious. —2 Corinthians 3:6-11

According to the Apostle Paul, then, we are not under the Decalogue: i.e. that which is “written and engraven in stones.” We are under the commandments of the New Covenant (Testament), which does, however, happen to contain similarities to nine of the Ten Commandments.

1st Commandment, Old Testament:

“I am the LORD thy God, … Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.” (Exodus 20:2,3)

1st Commandment, New Testament:

“…Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. ” (Matthew 4:10/Luke 4:8)

2nd Commandment, Old Testament:

“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, … lt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them:”(Exodus 20:4-6)

2nd Commandment, New Testament:

“But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols…” (Acts 15:20)

3rd Commandment, Old Testament:

“Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in vain.” (Exodus 20:7)

3rd Commandment, New Testament:

“…that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed.” (1 Timothy 6:1)

4th Commandment Old Testament:

“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy, six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, …” (Exodus 20:8-11)

4th Commandment, New Testament

This commandment is not repeated in the New Testament.

5th Commandment, Old Testament:

“Honor thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.” (Exodus 20:12)

5th Commandment, New Testament:

“Honour thy father and thy mother…” (Matthew 19:19/Mark 10:19/Luke 18:20)

6th Commandment, Old Testament:

“Thou shalt not kill (murder).” (Exodus 20:13)

6th Commandment, New Testament:

“…Thou shalt not kill…” (Romans 13:9)

7th Commandment, Old Testament:

“Thou shalt not commit adultery” (Exodus 20:14)

7th Commandment, New Testament:

“Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery…”
(Matthew 19:18/Mark 10:19/Luke 18:20)

8th Commandment, Old Testament:

“Thou shalt not steal.” (Exodus 20:15)

8th Commandment, New Testament:

“Thou shalt not steal . . ” (Matthew 19:18/Romans 13:9)

9th Commandment, Old Testament:

“Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” (Exodus 20:16)

9th Commandment, New Testament:

“…Thou shalt not bear false witness…” (Matthew 19:18/Romans 13:9)

10th Commandment, Old Testament:

“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is thy neighbour’s.” (Exodus 20:17)

10th Commandment, New Testament:

“But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;” (Ephesians 5:3)

The abolition of the Old Covenant, in its entirety, was also foretold by Moses. After he came down (from being with God, on Mt Sinai) with the Ten Commandments, Moses wore a veil to prevent the Israelites from seeing the fading reflection of God's glory on his face, which presaged the future obsolescence and complete abolition of the Old Covenant (cf Exodus 34:27-35 with 2 Corinthians 3:6-13). The ministration of death “written and engraved on stones,” referenced in 2 Corinthians 3:7, refers to the Old Covenant law of Moses. That which is being abolished, in v13 (“And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished”) refers to the Old Covenant becoming obsolete and being abolished. Which covenant is to be replaced with a completely New Testament.

“Could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished.” —Better, “look on the end of that which was perishing.” “Literally, the words state the fact, they could not see how the perishing glory ended. In the interpretation of the parable St. Paul seems to say that what was true of those older Israelites was true also of their descendants. They could not see the true end of the perishing system of the Law, its aim, purport, consummation. … Had their eyes been open, they would have seen in the fading away of the old glory of the decaying “letter” the dawn of a glory that excelled it. And in the thought that this was the true “end” of the Law we find the ground for the Apostle’s assertion that he used great plainness of speech. He had no need to veil his face or his meaning, for he had no fear lest the glory of the gospel of which he was a minister should fade away.” —Ellicott.

“Could not stedfastly look”: “Could not gaze intently upon (ἀτενίσαι atenisai). They could not clearly discern it; there was obscurity arising from the fact of the designed concealment. He did not intend that they should clearly see the full purport and design of the institutions which he established.

“To the end” (εἰς τὸ τέλος eis to telos). Unto the end, purpose, design, or ultimate result of the Law which he established. …There was a glory and splendor in that which the institutions of Moses typified, which the children of Israel were not permitted then to behold. There was a splendor and luster in the face of Moses, which they could not gaze upon, and therefore he put a veil over it to diminish its intense brightness. In like manner there was a glory and splendor in the ultimate design and scope of his institutions, in that to which they referred, which they were not then "able," that is, prepared to look on, and the exceeding brightness of which he of design concealed. This was done by obscure types and figures, that resembled a veil thrown over a dazzling and splendid object.

“The word ‘end,’ then, I suppose, does not refer to termination, or close, but to the ‘design, scope, or purpose’ of the Mosaic institutions; to that which they were intended to introduce and adumbrate. that end was the Messiah, and the glory of his institutions: ‘Christ is the end of the Law.’ And the meaning of Paul, I take to be, is, that there was a splendor and a glory in the gospel which the Mosaic institutions were designed to typify, which was so great that the children of Israel were not fully prepared to see it, and that he designedly threw over that glory the veil of obscure types and figures; as he threw over his face a veil that partially concealed its splendor. Thus, interpreted there is a consistency in the entire passage, and very great beauty. Paul, in the following verses, proceeds to state that the veil to the view of the Jews of his time was not removed; that they still looked to the obscure types and institutions of the Mosaic Law rather than on the glory which they were designed to adumbrate; as if they should choose to look upon the veil on the face of Moses rather than on the splendor which it concealed.

"Of that which is abolished” - Or rather to be abolished, τοῦ καταργουμένου to katargoumenou), whose nature, design, and intention it was that it should be abolished. It was never designed to be permanent; and Paul speaks of it here as a thing that was known and indisputable that the Mosaic institutions were designed to be abolished.” —Barnes

Conclusion

Paul is contrasting the Old and the New Covenants here, distinguishing between the ministries under each. No one could satisfy the demands of the law under the Old Covenant, so it condemned them to death (cf Psalms 143:1-2; Romans 3:19-20; 7:9-11; 2 Corinthians 3:6; Galatians 3:10-11). The ministry of the Spirit under the New Covenant is entirely different, because the New Covenant is a covenant of grace, entered into through the atoning death of Jesus, Who has made salvation possible for all who believe on Him; which was impossible under the Old Covenant (cf 2 Corinthians 3:8-11; with Acts 13:38-39; Romans 3:21-26; 7:5-6; 8:1-4; Galatians 2:16).

So, then, not only were the civil and ceremonial laws abolished by the New Covenant, but the moral law (the Ten Commandments) as well. Now, mark this well, it is not that God abolished His moral standard for man; only the written contract from Mt Sinai was abolished. The Christian is under a new contract which reintroduces the moral standards of God. Yahweh’s moral standards never change and have been restated in the Christian Scriptures for the New Covenant (see the list above). Nine of the ten commands are reinstitute for the New Covenant. Only the 4th Commandment, concerning keeping the Sabbath, is not stipulated in God’s new contract with the New Israel of Faith (i.e. the Church).

One might reason: Since the moral standards of Yahweh are the same, should we not retain the more law of the Old Covenant (i.e. the Decalogue)? No. Because the Decalogue is the written contract God had with His former people. That contract is now made void through their disobedience (Jer 31:31-32). Because for the very reason of their disobedience, the prophet Hosea foretold of the time when the Mosaic Law, along with its sabbaths days, would be abolished: “I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her Sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts.” —Hosea 2:11

Concerning the moral law of both covenants, an analogy may help us better understand: “It can be compared to a real estate contract. A real estate agent makes two contracts for two men who are buying two different houses. Although both contracts will contain similar elements and language, they are indeed two different contracts. The two contracts will also have many differences between them. They may both include information such as payment, lot space, or time of purchase, but they will have differences. The one man is not subject to the other's contract, neither vice-versa. The Mosaic Covenant is not the church's covenant. It contains many similar elements, but it has many differences. We are not to obey a commandment from the Law simply because there is a similar command in our covenant. We are only subject to the terms of our own covenant, i.e. the New Covenant.” (Quote adapted from Theosophical Ruminations, Jason Dulle)

Apostolically Speaking,
☩☩ Jerry L Hayes
(Mar David Ignatius)

This has been Chapter Two of a two chapter series on how the Christian should respond to the 7th day Sabbath. Be sure to read Chapter One at the link provided here:

Christianity's Association With The 7th Day Sabbath
http://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2019/07/christianity-and-seventh-day-sabbath.html

Be sure to listen and subscribe to the Bishop's Podcast: Apostolic Bishop, at:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-apostolicbishops-podcast/id1472262392?fbclid=IwAR2FlRYnNsw5Vu_Bz4PjyEdiAxFMawhtD2BFr_S7WysrpFcYjuQYSHGAlZ

Hello friends, I am a full time biblical researcher. I rely on freewill love offerings (from those of you who benefit from my work) and book sales for my support. Would you please consider leaving a small donation at the link provided here? Thank you for your support. -JLH

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=4EXSWA2A47ARC

Apologia is a polemical work of apologetics in the defense of Christian sacred days. Our focus is Sunday worship, Easter and Christmas. There has been little written in the line of a strong apologia for the observance to the traditional times. Bishop Hayes offers his work "Apologia, A Defense of Christian Sacred Days" to meet that need. This book establishes why Christians have observed Sunday as their primary day of worship right out of the gate. Also, within the pages of "Apologia" the reader will discover the true meaning of the terms 'Easter" and "Christmas". Both terms have come under sustained attack in recent years from an element that is antagonistic to traditional Christianity. Bishop Jerry L Hayes comes to the defense of historical Christianity in this work that is destined to become a classic. We know you will want to recommend "Apologia, A Defense of Christian Sacred Days" to all your friends and family.
Order your personal copy today from the link provided here:https://www.amazon.com/Apologia-Defense-Christian-Sacred-Days/dp/1099666589/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Apologia%2C+Hayes&qid=1558905902&s=books&sr=1-1

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT BY PURCHASING MY BOOKS FOR YOUR LIBRARY. -JLH