Why We’re Not Under the Mosaic Law

Why We Should Hope That Isn't True
In a post where I touched on the change from Saturday to Sunday as the day of worship, I was challenged in the comments to explain “who mandated this change” and give Bible references to back it up. Matthew 5:17 was offered as evidence against a Sabbath day change. Here’s what the verse says in context: The great conflict in human history is the war between God's Law and man's law. Between Theonomy and Autonomy. Between Jerusalem and Athens. Between the City of God and the City of Man. The City of Man is the Society of Satan. The Law of God brings Peace on Earth; The Law of Man brings War.

The prophet Micah described the establishment of Christ's Theonomic Kingdom:

And it will come about in the last days
That the mountain of the House of the LORD
Will be established as the chief of the mountains
And it will be raised above the hills
And the peoples will stream to it.
And many nations will come and say,
"Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD
And to the House of the God of Jacob,
That He may teach us about His ways
And that we may walk in His paths."
For from Zion will go forth the Law
Even the Word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
Tragically, there are many who claim to be Christian who are telling us the opposite:
"Let us ignore His ways;
let us not walk in His paths;
let us ignore His Law
and let not His Word go forth."

These people do not believe they are morally obligated to build the Kingdom of God. They're just waiting to be "raptured." So we continue to be ruled by the rich (Proverbs 7:22), we refuse to beat our swords into plowshares and millions die around the world, and we ignore "the least of these" in our own backyard.

Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. (Matt. 5:17–20)

 So the article in the left-hand column is guilty of teaching others to NOT obey God's Word as it is found in the Law and the Prophets. Not off to a good start.
I decided to adapt and post my answer here because it applies not just to the Sabbath but to any of the Old Testament laws, and I’ve noticed that concern about whether or not we ought to be following the Mosaic Law has been increasing among Christians (I give my theory as to why this is happening here). Notice that there is no real interaction -- much less a rebuttal -- to what Jesus said in Matthew 5:17-20. If you are not obeying God's Law ("the Law and the Prophets") and if you are teaching others to not obey God's Law, you are "least in the Kingdom." Period. In fact, "you will not enter the kingdom of heaven."

A Change in the Law

A Change in WHICH Law?
  The word "law" is used in many different ways. The word "law" in Romans 7 -- in the space of one single chapter -- has more than one meaning.
verse 12: "So then, the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good."
verse 23: "But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
verse 25: "So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin."
Then in chapter 8,
verse 2:  "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
verse 4: "That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

Why are those who are "in the flesh" unable to please God? Because they are "not subject to the Law of God." But those who are "in the Spirit" have God's Law written on their hearts, as Jeremiah and Ezekiel foretold of the New Covenant, and they "do and teach" the Torah, as Jesus said.

But even that word "Torah" is unclear, because in the Bible there are many different "Torot" (plural of "torah"). You might want to click over to this article for more details:

Is the Law of Moses (Torah) Still Binding? -- A Theonomic Answer

The Jews of Jesus' day claimed to be the defenders of Moses, the upholders of "law," but Jesus said they "made God's Law of none effect," calling their own traditions "law" (Matthew 15, Mark 7). Paul makes clear that Christians are not obligated to obey every "torah" that comes walking down the street.
A specific mandate to change the day of rest from Saturday to Sunday doesn’t explicitly appear in the New Testament. What is mandated is a change in the Law (see Heb. 7–10, especially 7:11–12 and 8:13), and the Sabbath was part of that Law. We’re now free to worship and rest whenever we like, and Christians have historically chosen to honor the day Jesus rose from the dead and freed us from the Law, which was “only a shadow of the good things to come” (Heb. 10:1). Just as there were many "torot," there were many "sabbaths" in the Old Testament. This will come as a surprise to many, but the Fourth Commandment (work six days and rest on the seventh) is about resting from work (duh.) but it says nothing about "worship." There's nothing in the New Testament about changing the day of rest from the seventh day to any other day. "Christians have historically" not gotten everything right.
When we’re united to Jesus, we become heirs of the promises given to Abraham not the Law given to Moses—promises that were guaranteed by God’s grace, through faith, not through law, according to Romans 4:13–16. Galatians 3 explains, It is true Christians are "sons of Abraham." See the verses in the link above. It's true Christians are heirs of the promises given to Abraham. Are we also heirs to the laws given by God to Abraham? Why or why not?

And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;
Because that Abraham obeyed My Voice, and kept My Charge, My Commandments, My Statutes, and My Torah.
Genesis 26:4-5

Abraham lived centuries before God gave tablets of stone to Moses. So equating "Torah" with Moses is a mistake. But the Pharisees made the same mistake. They spoke of circumcision (which was given to Abraham) as being from Moses:

Moses therefore gave you circumcision (not that it is from Moses, but from the fathers), and you circumcise a man on the Sabbath.
John 7:22

But Abraham, the father of the faithful, seems to have had a pro-torah attitude. The word "torah" means "direction." Godly people follow God's directions.

What "Law" was given to Moses?

Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed…that is, Christ…. [T]he Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate a covenant [with Abraham] previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise. For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise.

 What "law" came 430 years after Abraham? Was Abraham morally obligated to not have sex with animals (Leviticus 18:23)? Where does it say that in the book of Genesis?

That which Christians inherit does not come to them by the law of genealogy, as the Jews maintained. You don't inherit the promises made to Abraham simply because you are a genetic descendant of Abraham.
If God never intended to grant Abraham’s inheritance through law, then why did God give the Law? Paul responds to this question in the rest of chapter three. As part of his answer, he says we were “kept in custody under the law,” and “the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ.... But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.” There are two different concepts of "law" in that first sentence. The author of that article is mixing up different concepts of "law" and causing no end of confusion.

Two things are clear in the New Testament:

  1. You do not inherit the promises given to Abraham simply because you are legally a genetic descendant of Abraham
    That's what Paul means when he says, "For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise."
    The word "seed" in that passage is your clue here. Adoption is by faith.
  2. If you refuse to obey God's Law, you will be disinherited (we say "excommunicated"). Or as Jesus put it, "least in the Kingdom."
The Law was a shadow pointing to the reality of Christ (Heb. 10:1, Col. 2:16–17). Now that we have Christ, we’re no longer under the shadow because we have the substance: So it's OK to have sex with animals?

Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day—things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ. (Col. 2:16–17)

 Back to sabbaths we go. Clearly there is a difference between Old Testament "festivals" and homosexuality. Maybe the author should have gone to seminary instead of getting a degree in "mass communication and journalism."
Jesus was the real sacrifice—not a sacrifice under the Mosaic Law but the true sacrifice that the Mosaic Law, the shadow, was pointing to (Heb. 8). His sacrifice and work as our high priest were not part of the Mosaic covenantal system. In fact, if we were still under the Mosaic Law with its Levitical priesthood, Jesus (who is not a Levite) could not act as our priest at all. Hebrews 7:11–22 explains: Yes, Jesus was the sacrifice that the law of Moses was pointing to. Trying to obey the pointers won't work. The "Law and the Prophets" (Matthew 5:17-20) said this. Greg Bahnsen, in his book Theonomy in Christian Ethics, pp. 208-209, notes:

Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek [i.e., Jesus], and not be designated according to the order of Aaron? For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also….

For, on the one hand, there is a setting aside of a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness (for the Law made nothing perfect), and on the other hand there is a bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God…. Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant. [Emphasis mine.]

The Levitical priesthood, representing the Mosaic system of ceremonial redemption, could not bring perfection and so was intended to be superseded (Heb. 7:11f.,28) . . . . The former commandment with reference to ceremonial matters was set aside . . . in order that God's people might have a better hope, for the ceremony was imperfect and kept men at a distance from God (Heb. 7:18f.). [S]uch a change in stipulation is also a confirmation of the Older Testamental law as implied in Psalm 110:1,4.
Hebrews goes on to say that the New Covenant “made the [Old Covenant] obsolete,” and “whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear” (Heb. 8:13).* In 1 Corinthians 9, Paul is talking about how congregations should support church-planters. He says Christians are obligated to follow Mosaic laws which are not in the same class of Mosaic laws as festivals, sacrifices, and sabbaths:

Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? 2 If I am not an apostle to others, yet doubtless I am to you. For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.
       3 My defense to those who examine me is this: 4 Do we have no right to eat and drink? 5 Do we have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?6 Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working? 7 Who ever goes to war at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its fruit? Or who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk of the flock?
       8 Do I say these things as a mere man? Or does not the law say the same also? 9 For it is written in the law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain.” [Deuteronomy 25:4] Is it oxen God is concerned about? 10 Or does He say it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written, that he who plows should plow in hope, and he who threshes in hope should be partaker of his hope. 11 If we have sown spiritual things for you, is it a great thing if we reap your material things?

The law of Moses is for us. Not the laws for the Levitical priesthood, but Paul told Timothy that the Old Testament ("the Scriptures" which Timothy learned as a child) is still binding, because it was "breathed-out" by God. Micah said,

For from Zion will go forth the Law
Even the Word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

"Law." "Word." This is "Hebrew Parallelism." All of God's Word is "Law."

But if we sin, we have a High Priest in the order of Melchizedek to bring us back into fellowship with God. Note that God used a Levitical priesthood under Moses. But God prophesied a change in priesthood, as Bahnsen explained above, from Psalm 110:1,4.

The Old Covenant contained a promise about the New Covenant. The New Covenant expressly quotes this Old Covenant promise. The promise is that New Covenant Christians would keep the Old Covenant law. Jeremiah  revealed God's plan:

Jeremiah 31:33
But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put My Torah in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be My people.

Christians are God's chosen "People" (1 Peter 2:9-10). They obey God's Torah.

Jeremiah's word is quoted by the writer to the Hebrews:

Hebrews 8:8-12

8 For finding fault with them, He says,

“Behold, days are coming, says the Lord,
When I will effect a new covenant
With the house of Israel and with the house of Judah;
9 Not like the covenant which I made with their fathers
On the day when I took them by the hand
To lead them out of the land of Egypt;
For they did not continue in My covenant,
And I did not care for them, says the Lord.
10 “For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
After those days, says the Lord:
I will put My laws into their minds,
And I will write them on their hearts.
And I will be their God,
And they shall be My people.
11 “And they shall not teach everyone his fellow citizen,
And everyone his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’
For all will know Me,
From the least to the greatest of them.
12 “For I will be merciful to their iniquities,
And I will remember their sins no more.”

When Jeremiah prophesied these words, he said God would write His TORAH on the hearts of Christians. Not just so that we would have them memorized, but that we would obey them.

Ezekiel 11:19-20
19 And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them a heart of flesh, 20 that they may walk in My statutes and keep Mine ordinances, and do them. And they shall be My people, and I will be their God.
 
Ezekiel 36:27
27 And I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and ye shall keep My judgments and do them.

Abraham was under the Melchizedek priesthood. It makes sense, therefore, that Christians, being the true spiritual descendants of Abraham, would have a pro-Torah, Theonomic outlook, like Abraham did, and like Jeremiah and Ezekiel prophesied that members of the New Covenant would have.

One New Body

  
Ephesians 2:11–22 is helpful for understanding all of this. It explains that God brought both Jews and Gentiles together “into one new man”—not into the Mosaic Covenant but as one new man. In fact, it says the reason why Christ is able to reconcile both Jews and Gentiles “in one body” is this: "not into the Mosaic Covenant" -- OK, into the "Abrahamic Covenant." What is the practical difference in our lives?

He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man.” [Emphasis mine.]

 The New Testament is clear: non-Israelites are not obligated to be circumcised. That is the class of "the law of commandments" that Paul is talking about, not laws against homosexuality, bestiality, muzzling oxen, and safety precautions around your roof if you party up there. These laws did not separate Jews and Gentiles. If you mistreat animals by violating "the law and the prophets" (Matthew 5:17-20), and teach others that they are not obligated to be a "holy" law-abiding "people," then you are "least in the Kingdom."
In other words, Christ broke down the barrier of the Law, “abolishing it” through His sacrifice on the cross, so that He could bring us together without the Mosaic Law and create one new man. He didn’t graft us into the Mosaic Covenant. The laws against homosexuality and bestiality were no "barrier." Bad metaphors make bad theology.

The Requirements of the Law Are Unyielding

  
Now how does this relate to Matthew 5:17? Matthew is very focused on the subject of true righteousness in his Gospel. The Pharisees were trying to follow rules, but they were constantly breaking the deeper spirit of the Law (as everyone does). They didn’t realize how far short they fell of fulfilling the Law, which is why Jesus kept pointing out that their actions (such as divorce, lust, and anger) were breaking the spirit of the Law. The Pharisees were not trying to OBEY God's Law. They were trying to EVADE it. The Jews rejected the Torah in the Scriptures and replaced God's Law with their own man-made customs and traditions (Mark 7:1-16).  For a thorough defense of this contrast, see Jesus and the Law of Moses (Torah). See also Why Jews Don't Believe In Jesus.
There was no hope for them in following the Law because it was too high of a standard and there would be no leniency. As Jesus said in 5:17, He didn’t come to lessen the requirements of the Law (which was how the Pharisees were attempting to fulfill the Law and attain righteousness—that is, by lessening the requirements, ignoring the spirit of the Law and annulling commandments). Rather, He came to fulfill the requirements perfectly—in spirit as well as letter. He’s the only person who could! The Pharisees who were attempting to obtain righteousness through the Law had no hope because no aspect of the Law would be lessened for anyone attempting to obtain righteousness in that way. “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all” (James 2:10). Correct: "annulling" God's Law.

The Pharisees were not attempting to "obtain righteousness through the Law" of God, but through their own "law."
The only way to have a righteousness that “surpasses that of the Pharisees” (Matt. 5:17–20)—the kind required to “enter the kingdom of heaven,” according to Jesus—is to be joined to Christ, who fulfilled “the smallest letter of the Law,” so that He stands with His righteousness in our place. The only way to have a righteousness that surpasses that of the Pharisees is to obey God's Law rather than "the traditions of the elders."
Luke 16:16–17 also touches on this idea. Jesus says,  

The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since that time the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail.

  
Trying to reach salvation by way of the Law is impossible, for “it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail.” We simply can’t make it that way. But now, since the time of John the Baptist, the Gospel is being preached, and everyone is coming through Christ and the Gospel. So it's OK to have sex with animals? The author is confusing "justification" and "sanctification." No human being is declared by God the Judge to be sinlessly righteous based on sinlessly righteous behavior throughout life. Only by having the sinnlessly righteous life of Christ imputed to your account can you hope for God's declaration of "not guilty." Every Theonomist agrees with this.

That does not mean we are not morally obligated to obey God's Law.

Indeed, why should anyone worry about being "forgiven" if we were never morally obligated?

Justification by Law -- Theonomy on Steroids

Not Our Covenant

  
The Mosaic Law is simply not our covenant. We’re united to Christ, and we’re in. None of this is to say we can’t take a day to rest and worship. It’s a good idea! (We’re even free to follow the Old Testament rule for Saturday if we wish.) It just means we’re not bound to a law about this, and we’re free to worship on the day that represents the Gospel rather than the Mosaic Law. But the Covenant that  is  our covenant is a covenant that requires and promises obedience to the Torah.
For more on how Christians should view the Mosaic Law, see “How Can I Know Which Bible Promises Apply to Me?” and Greg’s “How Does the Old Testament Law Apply to Christians Today?”  
________________________  
*Though we are not under the specific regulations, blessings, and curses of the Mosaic Law today, it remains for us “profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, [and] for training in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16); for by it, we learn much about God’s holiness, justice, and character—what He loves and hates—so that we can know God and know what it means to love Him and love our neighbor today.  

: