The weeping Old
Testament prophet, Jeremiah, said, "Behold, the days come, saith the
Lord, that 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 bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they
brake, although I was a husband unto them, said the Lord: But this
shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel;
after those days, said the Lord, I will put my law in their inward
parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God,
and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man
his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying `Know the Lord': for
they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of
them, said the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will
remember their sin no more" (31:31-34).
Observe some things
that the prophet said. (1) God would make a new covenant. (2)
This new covenant would not be like the one God made with
their fathers at the time he led them out of the land of Egypt. (3)
This new covenant would be written in their hearts, whereas
the one made with their fathers was written upon two tables of stone
(Ex 31:18). (4) Whereas the children of Israel were born into
covenant relationship with God and then taught who He was and His
laws (Dt. 6:6-9), in the new covenant they would know the
Lord before and in order to enter into Covenant relationship with
him. (5) God would make a new Covenant not renew an
existing one.
When was this
fulfilled? We do not have to guess about it. We have Inspiration
telling us of the fulfillment of it. In Hebrews 8:6 we learn Jesus
Christ "is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established
upon better promises." This covenant was a better covenant
and it had better promises. Then we are told in Hebrews
8:7, "For if that first covenant had been faultless, then
should no place have been sought for the second." Then the
Hebrew writer quotes Jeremiah 31:31-34 in Hebrews 8:8-12
and says "In that he saith, A new covenant, he had made the
first old. Now that which decayed and waxeth old is ready
to vanish away." We learn that which is called the old
covenant was to vanish away.
Continuing in the
book of Hebrews, we are told Jesus Christ "is the mediator of the
new testament, that by means of death for the redemption of the
transgressions that were under the first testament, they
which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death
of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead;
otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without
blood" (9:15-18).
If one had no more
than the above, if he read with any discernment at all it would be
obvious that there is an old testament and that there is a
new testament.
In 2 Corinthians 3
Paul said God "had made us able ministers of the new testament"
(2 Cor. 3:6). Paul goes on to show that "if the ministration
of death, written, and engraven in stones, was
glorious, so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly
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. Seeing then that we have such
hope, we use great plainness of speech. And not as Moses, which put
a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not
steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: But
their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil
untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil
is done away in Christ" (2 Cor. 3:6-14).
In the above
Corinthian passage Paul shows that what he called the old
testament which in context he describes as the "ministration
of condemnation" was to be "done away." In contrast he
speaks of the "ministration of the spirit" and the "ministration
of righteousness" which he identifies as the new testament.
Over the years gospel
preachers have understood this and have so preached. Brethren have
also so understood the difference in the old and new
testaments. Most people in denominational circles have also
understood this even though they did not always make the proper
application of it. When people did not understand the Scriptures,
many times it was because they did not understand the difference in
the old and new testaments.
Several years ago I
spoke to a group of young people at one of the larger Baptist
Churches in Hueytown on "The New Testament Church" with a question
and answer session following. Many of their questions were answered
by showing the difference in the old and new testaments.
The pastor's wife tried her best to confuse the minds of the young
people after I would answer their questions. However, from their
comments after the session she did not do a very good job.
A new day has dawned
upon brethren. From several places voices are being heard that show
(1) some brethren never understood the difference in the old and new
testaments; (2) they have forgotten what they have known, or (3)
they have rejected their past knowledge and have come up with some
new thing. While each man states his views in a little different
way, the basic position is that there is no such thing as an old and
new testament. There is only one law for God's people in every age.
That law is described by various terms, but essentially they all
come out at the same place.
Various Statements of
Error
(1) Universal
Moral Law. In his book, The Divorced and Remarried Who Would
Come to God, brother Homer Hailey writes about something being
the "universal moral law." I know where to read in the Bible about
the law of Moses (1 Cor. 9:9; Lk. 24:44), the law of Christ
(Gal. 6:2; 1 Cor. 9:21) and the law of God (Rom. 7:22).
I know of no Bible passage that mentioned the "universal moral law"
and someone would do me a favor if they would write this passage on
a post card and send it me. Brother Hailey never did cite the book,
chapter and verse for his "universal moral law."
Brother Hailey
said,"The universal moral law revealed within, strengthened and
re-enforced the law of Moses.....All of the universal moral
law....is included in the law of Christ" (page 46). Of what he calls
the "universal moral law" he says "This law....was never abrogated"
(page 47). Then concludes by saying, "Therefore, all men continue to
live under this moral law, Jew and Gentile, alien and Christian -
the Christian because God's moral law is fully revealed in Christ's
covenant law to the saints" (page 47).
(2) An unknown
writer says, "..the Laws given at Sinai are not Moses, but
God!...I teach from the Greek and Hebrew that the law is not put
aside....I show conclusively from the Greek and Hebrew that although
we are not saved by the Law, we are nonetheless required to Keep it"
(sic) (Courthouse Contender, Jan. 1997, page 2). Respectfully, I must say this preacher would do
well to teach anyone from the English, much less the Hebrew and
Greek. If he teaches we must keep the law, I wonder how many animal
sacrifices he has offered lately? Paul says this one is "fallen from
grace" (Gal. 5:4).
(3) Wallace Little.
Brother Little writes "Colossians 2:11-14 deals in sin and
salvation. Contextually verse 14 must mean that sin, NOT any law,
was nailed to the cross. Verse 15 is transitional, leading to verses
16-17 showing the ceremonial aspect of Mosaical Law is no longer
binding." He also criticizes those who say "God's universal moral
law is a myth" (Gospel Truths, May, 1997, page 14). Thus,
brother Little accepts the idea of God's universal moral law." He
says "the ceremonial aspect of Mosaical Law is no longer binding."
Seventh Day Adventists make the same argument in order to "remember
the Sabbath day, to keep it holy." They say the moral law, which
they say includes Sabbath observance, is still binding, but the
ceremonial law was nailed to the cross. The Bible makes no such
distinction.
(4) Jim Puterbaugh.
In a series of lessons presented in the Tampa, Florida area around
1993, brother Puterbaugh said, "The Bible never precisely condemns
polygamy. It's like slavery. God allowed slavery in the law of Moses
and then slavery just disappears when we get over into
Christianity...but is there a verse that says slavery is
immoral?...Even in Philemon Paul doesn't condemn slavery. And that's
the way I look at the concubines or polygamy, that they do not
precisely violate moral law as God reveals it but once you have
Christianity, it just seems to disappear, like slavery does...What
about Abraham? He had a wife and a concubine under the universal,
moral law, as it was. Was he in sin, then? He was under the
universal, original law and was he in sin? I think we'd all have to
say that he, that we couldn't say he was in a state of sin that was
going to keep him from going to heaven, at least...that's the only
way I know how to deal with it...I just confess to you that it is a
struggle, that it is a problem" (quoted by brother Jim McDonald in
The Dyersburg Path Finder, June 15, 1997, page 5).
If the Bible does not
condemn polygamy, and if all men are under what some brethren are
calling "God's universal moral law" and that is the one covenant
through all history, what would these men say to a man or woman who
had a multiplicity of spouses today? Do brethren not realize in the
beginning it was "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his
mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh"
(Gen. 2:24) and when Lamech, Noah's father, "took unto him
two wives" (Gen. 4:19) that he had violated God's law? If
Lamech was keeping God's original law with at least two wives, why
could not men today keep God's original law on marriage by having a
multiplicity of wives?
(5) Stanley W.
Paher. In some material sent to me by this individual, whose
name I recognize but is unknown by face to me, some statements are
made that teach the basic position set forth above by others. He
says, "Even the classic passage on covenant, Jeremiah 31:31-34
(Heb 8:6-11), does not mention the Ten Commandments or refer to
any list of codified statutes" (page 1). I have never heard of
anyone who claimed that, but you can see what he is setting up. He
further says on page 7, "Jeremiah 31:31-43 could have had
multiple fulfillments, first when the Jews returned to their
homeland in 536 B. C., and then in the first century." The
fulfillment was going out of Jerusalem, not going into Jerusalem.
He says, "In
Isaiah 2:2 the time of the latter days' is not specified...
.Instead, the 'law going forth from Jerusalem' was fulfilled during
the time after the Jews returned from Babylonian captivity,'in the
future' (latter days)" (page 3). Peter identifies the "last days" as
being the gospel age or "apostolic era" in Acts 2, not a partial
fulfillment sometime before the day of Pentecost.
On page 4 he says,
"In Col. 2:14, that which was 'nailed to the cross' was not
the 'Old law,' nor was it sin per se, but the debt which sin
created... .Therefore, law was not nailed to the cross: it was the
sin-debt...." On Hebrews 10:9-10 he says "God took away the
first set of sacrifices (not covenant or law) in order to establish
the second, the pleasing sacrifice of Christ" (page 4). He says that
in the context of Hebrews 10:1-10 the word "covenant...does not
appear in the context." That is true, but in context the term 'law"
in found in verse 8 and "Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O
God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second."
Second what? Sacrifice? No, will; for the text continues to "by the
which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of
Jesus Christ once for all" (verse 10). The contrast is not between
sacrifice one and sacrifice two, but between law or will one and
will two. The second will or law had one sacrifice. Under the first
law there were many sacrifices.
Paher continues by
saying of the "Old Testament worthies" that "their sins were
'genuinely forgiven' and forgotten, Frank (Jamerson, tgo) just as
yours and mine are" (page 5). Well, if they were, then they were
without the blood or sacrifice of Jesus Christ upon the cross! Paher
has men saved without the blood of Christ. Never let him teach Jesus
as the way, the truth and the life again (Jno. 14:6). He has
surrendered that for all time to come. See the position a man gets
himself in when he tries to re-arrange the teachings of Scripture?
He says, page 7, "the
law was not done away at the cross of Christ." And on page 9, he
said, "Paul did not regard the Law of Moses as abrogated at the time
of Christ's death." If that is so, where did he build his tabernacle
and where did he go to keep the Passover?
He further writes of
a single covenant throughout all generations. He says "the eternal
covenant" is "the everlasting covenant" which "terms of covenant
extended to people of active faith throughout the ages, remaining
constant from the time of the Patriarchs, past Moses, David and the
Prophets, and into the Christian era....God has had a single
covenant concept in mind..." What We Are Saying About Covenant,
(page 1). On page 2 he says "the everlasting (eternal) covenant is
established forever." Again on page 2, "All people, whether they
lived before or after the cross of Christ are subject to general law
(universal moral law)." On page 3 he writes of the "old and new
(renewed) covenants" and says "all OT saints are also our covenant
brethren. The single covenant concept thus binds all of God's elect
into one body or church, one everlasting kingdom, one sheepfold with
one heavenly destination" (pages 3-4).
Purpose
The reader should
keep in mind the purpose of all of the above confusion. These men
are attempting to find a justification from the Scriptures for men
to marry and divorce as many times as they wish and still be
approved of God. If this is not apparent to the reader, then let him
read after them in their writings in the future and he will see this
is so. These men will get even bolder in their writings in the
future to where there will be no misunderstanding as to what they
are teaching. At the present these false teachers within the church
do not want their error fully understood. They want time to sow
their seeds of falsehood without it being detected for what it is.
But, then, that is nothing new for that is the way false teachers
have always worked.
What Saith The
Scriptures?
There is a period of
Bible history that has been called the Patriarchal Age because
during this period of time God spoke directly with the father of the
family. Genesis 1 through Exodus 20 covers much of this period of
time. During the Patriarchal period God called Abraham in Genesis 12
and made certain promises unto him. God began dealing with Abraham
and his heirs. They went into Egypt and God brought them out. In
Exodus 20 God gave Abraham's heirs, Israel, the law. At this point
in Bible history the narrative concentrates for the most part upon
God dealing with Israel and not with the remainder of the world.
This period during which Israel was under God's law given by Moses
is covered from Exodus 20 through the gospel record of Matthew,
Mark, Luke and John. Beginning with Acts 2 on the day of Pentecost
when the gospel was preached for the first time in fact, when the
terms of remission of sins were first announced, and the Lord added
men to his church, we have a period of Bible history often called
the Gospel Age. This is the period of time in which we live and
which will continue until Jesus Christ comes again.
Law of Moses
What does the Bible
teach about the law of Moses?
The law of Moses was
not given to Gentiles. It was only given to the Jewish people. Moses
said, "Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in
your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep and do them.
The Lord our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. The Lord made not
this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of
us here alive this day" (Deut. 5:1-3). Moses said what God
told him to say concerning the covenant "It is a sign between me and
the children of Israel for ever" (Ex. 31:12-17). In Exodus
34:27-35 God said through Moses to Israel "I have made a
covenant with thee and with Israel" and "he wrote upon the tables
the words of the covenant, the ten commandments." Jeremiah said the
covenant God made with Israel was "in the day that I took them by
the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt" (31:31-34).
Ezekiel said the Sabbath, which was a part of that covenant, was a
sign between God and Israel (20:12). the covenant God made
with Israel was "in the day that I took them by the hand to bring
them out of the land of Egypt" (31:31-34). Ezekiel said the
Sabbath, which was a part of that covenant, was a sign between God
and Israel (20:12).
The Law |
contrasted with |
The Gospel of Christ |
1. Given by Moses, Jn.
1:17 |
|
1. Given by Christ, Jn.
1:17 |
2. Spoken by prophets,
Heb. 1:1 |
2. Spoken by Christ,
Heb. 1:2 |
3. To Jews only, Dt.
5:1-15 |
3. To every creature,
Mk. 16:15-16 |
4. To last till Christ,
Ex. 31:13-17 |
4. Last to end of world,
Mt. 28:20 |
5. Would pass away, Mt.
5:17 |
5. Abides forever, 1
Pet. 1:23-25 |
6. Changeable
priesthood, Heb. 7:12 |
6. Unchangeable
priesthood, Heb. 7:14 |
7. Blood of animals,
Heb. 10:4 |
7. Blood of Christ, Heb.
9:14 |
8. No forgiveness of
sins, Heb. 10:3 |
8. Sins forgiven, Heb.
8:12 |
9. High priest on earth,
Heb. 8:3-4 |
9. High priest not on
earth, Heb. 8:4 |
10. Law was good, Rom.
7:12 |
10. Better covenant,
Heb. 8:6 |
11. Imperfect, Heb. 8:7 |
11. Faultless, Heb. 8:7 |
12. Children by fleshly
birth |
12. Children by
spiritual birth, Jn. 3:3-5 |
13. Jew outwardly, Rom.
2:28 |
13. Jew inwardly, Rom.
2:29 |
Gentiles were not under the law of Moses. Paul
said the "Gentiles...have not the law" (Rom. 2:14). Moses
said "the Lord made not this covenant with our fathers but with us,
even us, who are all of us here alive this day" (Deut. 5:3).
The law of Moses was made known by God through
Moses from Mount Sinai. God caned Moses upon mount Sinai and spoke
to him (Ex. 19:16-25). God delivered to Moses his law that he
was to deliver unto the people (Ex. 20, 21, 22, 23). Part of
that law was "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy" (Ex.
20:8). Nehemiah said to God "Thou camest down also upon mount
Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right
judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments: And madest
known unto them thy holy Sabbath, and commandedst them precepts,
statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant" (Neh.
9:13-15).
The Sabbath was not observed from creation but
rather from mount Sinai. Moses said, "The Lord made not this
covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us
here alive this day" (Deut. 5:3). Nehemiah said, "Thou camest
down also upon mount Sinai...and madest known unto them thy holy
Sabbath" (Neh. 9:13-14). How could men keep that which had
not be made known unto them? The day God had Israel to keep holy
unto him was the same day upon which he had rested or ceased his
creation (Gen. 2:2). The Sabbath was observed not because God
rested on that day but because Israel had come out of Egyptian
bondage. God said, "remember that thou wast a servant in the land of
Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a
mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the Lord thy God
commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day" (Deut. 5:15).
Before God gave Israel the law at Sinai, there
was no command to keep the Sabbath, there was no one charged with
violating the Sabbath, and there was no punishment for Sabbath
violation.
The law of Moses was to last throughout the
generations of Israel and was to end at the cross of Christ. Moses
said the law was to last throughout the generations of Israel being
a perpetual covenant. "Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep
the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations,
for a perpetual covenant" (Ex. 31:16-17). The incense was to
be "a perpetual incense before the Lord throughout your generations"
(Ex. 30:8). Those who contend for the sabbath observance
today (the Seventh Day Adventist, the Seventh Day Baptist, and the
Seventh Day Church of God) do not argue for incense today, yet the
Bible says both were to be "perpetual" (Ex. 30:8; 31:16).
In the time of Amos at 760 B.C. some said, "When
will the new moon be gone, that we may sell corn? and the sabbath,
that we may set forth wheat, making the ephah small and the shekel
great, and falsifying the balances by deceit? That we may buy the
poor for silver, and the needy for a pair ofshoes; yea, and sell the
refuse of the wheat" (Amos 8:5-6)? Through Amos God's answer
was "it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord God, that I
will cause the sun to go down at noon, and I will darken the earth
in the clear day" (Amos 8:9). Matthew tells us at the
crucifixion of Christ "Now from the sixth hour there was darkness
over all the land unto the ninth hour" (Mt. 27:45). Thus,
when Christ was crucified, the law of Moses ended.
Those who argue for the sabbath observance today
try to make a distinction between the law of Moses and the law of
God, a distinction that the Bible doesn't make. Neither does the
Bible make a distinction between what is sometimes called the "moral
law" and the "ceremonial law."
God gave the law of Moses: - "the book of the law
of Moses, which the Lord had commanded to Israel" (Neh. 8:1).
"Ezra...was a ready scribe in the law of Moses, which the Lord God
of Israel had given" (Ezra 7:6).
Moses gave the law of God: - "to walk in God's
law, which was given by Moses the servant of God" (Neh. 10:29).
"Hilkiah the priest found a book of the law of the Lord given by
Moses" (2 Chron. 34:14).
Ezra was "a ready scribe in the law of Moses"
(Ezra 7:6) and "a scribe, even a scribe of the words of the
commandments of the God of heaven" (7:12).
In Luke 2:21-32 the expressions "law of
Moses," 'law of the Lord," and "the law" are used interchangeably.
In Mark 7 the scribes and Pharisees were told by
Jesus they laid aside the "commandment of God," they rejected "the
commandment of God" when they rejected what "Moses said" (Mk.
7:6-10). Mark tells us (7:10) that Moses said "Honor thy
father and thy mother" while Matthew tell us God said this (Mt.
15:4). Thus what Moses said in the law was the same as God
saying it.
The New
Testament Teaches The Law of Moses
Was Nailed To The Cross
Jesus said, "Think not that I am come to destroy
the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or
one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be
fulfilled" (Mt. 5:17-18). Observe Jesus was to fulfill the
law, not destroy it. Until it was fulfilled nothing would pass from
it. When it was fulfilled it would pass.
Paul raises the question "Wherefore then serveth
the law" (Gal. 3:19)? His answer is, "It was added because of
transgressions, till the seed should come..." (v. 19). The law was
till the seed should come. In the context of Galatians 3 "thy seed,
which is Christ" (v. 16). The law was added till or until Christ
came.
In Galatians 3 Paul also shows that "the law was
our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ" (v. 24). Once under Christ
or faith (verses 24-25), Paul says "we are no longer under a
schoolmaster" which was the law of Moses.
Colossians 2
"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). This is the
passage that seems to give the one covenant advocates a lot of
trouble. They are not sure what it teaches; one says it teaches that
"sin" was nailed to the cross and another says it teaches that the
"sin debt" was nailed to the cross. Yet, they are sure that it does
not teach that the law was nailed to the cross, which it does teach.
A parallel passage will help here. Speaking of
Christ, Paul said, "For he is our peace, who had made both one, and
hath broken down the middle wall of partition, between us; Having
abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments
contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new
man, so making peace" (Eph. 2:14-15).
Paul says what he calls "the middle wall of
partition" which was "between us", that is, between Jew and Gentile
has been 'broken down." He further says it was "abolished." He
further tells us the it was "the law of commandments" which was "in
ordinances." It has been "broken down" and "abolished."
Paul in Colossians says 'blotting out the
handwriting of ordinances." "It" was taken out of the way and "it"
was nailed to his cross. "It," the handwriting of ordinances," "the
middle wall of partition," "the law of commandments," the
"ordinances" were nailed to the cross. This is so plain. This is the
reason these one covenant advocates have got to get something
besides the law of Moses nailed to the cross. This passage stands in
their way. Brethren have well understood it down through the years.
If these one covenant fellows are correct, let us
see how they do. A part of the covenant that they say we are under
or that we are to keep is "remember the sabbath day, to keep it
holy."
Sabbath observance required: (1) limited travel,
(Ex. 16:28-30; Num. 35:5), (2) building no fire, (Ex.
35:3), (3) doing no work, (Ex. 20:10), (4) No cooking,
(Ex. 16:23), (5) purchasing no food (Neh. 10:31), (6)
gates closed, (Neh. 13:19), (7) carry no burdens, (Neh.
13: 15-18), (8) a burnt offering of two lambs of the first year
without spot, (Num. 28:9-10), (9) strangers among them were
to keep it, (Dt. 5:14), and (10) violators were to be
punished (Num. 15:32-36). Now, how many of these one covenant
advocates have done this?
"Walking in Truth" (Vol. 21, No.
4, Oct/Nov/Dec, 1997)
For Past Auburn Beacons go to:
www.aubeacon.com/Bulletins.htm |
Anyone can join the mailing list for the Auburn Beacon! Send
your request to:
larryrouse@aubeacon.com |
Other Articles
Sin, Repentance and Judging Others
Is God
Powerless Today?
Learning From the Instrumental Music
Controversy
Larimore and Tant
Reactions to Truth
Preaching the Cross