Nonconformist Chronicles

The Legal Code: Clarification and Disclaimers

My previous post referred to our having exchanged the legal code of Moses for the person of Jesus Christ. While not claiming originality for that phrasing, to just what am I referring as a “legal code”? Is it the Torah (Genesis-Deuteronomy), the entirety of the Hebrews Scriptures (a.k.a. the Old Testament), or something else altogether?

I am certainly not thinking of the entirety of the Torah or of the Hebrew Scriptures. These diverse bodies of literature consist of far more than just legal texts. So by “legal code,” I am thinking more in terms of legal sections within the Torah including especially the Book of the Covenant (Exodus 20:22-23:9), the Holiness Code (Leviticus 17-26), and the Law Code in Deuteronomy 12-26. We might also include the laws regarding priesthood and tabernacle (Exodus 25-31and 35:4-40:33) and perhaps the entire book of Leviticus.  By “legal code” I am thinking of covenant stipulations under Moses, perhaps especially in regard to civil law, worship regulations, special days, and “cultic” observance.

This was the law that was engraved in letters on stone (2 Cor. 3:7). It was deficient to save, not because of a defect in the law itself (Rom. 7:12), but due to the weakness of human flesh (Rom. 8:3).

But now, through a transforming encounter with the risen Messiah, the law once engraved on tablets of stone has been written on our hearts. We are now free, even empowered, to live holy and moral lives without reliance upon the legal stipulations that served as elaborations upon the Ten Commandments, which is the foundational summary of God’s timeless law, with perpetually abiding validity. In exchange for the legal stipulations of old, which revealed the heart of God and his desires for humanity, we now have Jesus whose ministry and teaching provide an even greater clarity into God’s heart and will.

I do not support the abrogation of God’s law, or of the Hebrew Scriptures, which Jesus had not come to abolish (Matt. 5:17). He fulfills them in terms of completing and perfecting the job they were assigned. His coming, however, does not render this body of literature obsolete. It remains useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness (2 Tim. 3:16). It remains a window into the heart of God which is now less opaque due to the New Testament authors’ Christocentric reading of these texts.

But here is what has changed. The legal texts of Moses were in some cases highly detailed and prescriptive. Some would read the New Testament literature as if it were the same genre as the Book of the Covenant or the Holiness Code. This amounts to viewing the New Testament books, not as occasional literature written to aid disciples in a Christocentric reading of the Hebrew Scriptures, but as a flat law code of new legal stipulations for Christians.

Where the old law / new law dichotomy really misses the point is its misunderstanding of law in Scripture. Those seeking to understand the New Testament writings as a legal code are making a similar mistake to the Judaizers of old. The law is imagined to be in a position it was never intended to hold. The law has never been a means of salvation. No one has ever been saved by law-keeping, under any covenant. Salvation has always been by grace through faith.

When law is held to be in the dubious position of Savior, there is urgency toward perfection in understanding or observance since one’s salvation is thought to depend upon it. So the apostolic literature is scoured for “rules” that will prescribe and regulate in as great detail as the legal texts of Moses. Salvation is misunderstood as a matter of keeping the code which one has to get right in order to keep it. So we find ourselves diligently searching the Scriptures, believing that in them we have eternal life, while failing to trust in Jesus as the Savior to whom the Scriptures point (John 5:39-40). This is bibliolatry, as trust in Jesus is exchanged for trust in our own adequacy to rightly interpret and keep the Word.

This approach not only misreads the New Testament literature, but likewise misreads the laws in Moses, which were never intended to be comprehensive, but paradigmatic. Obedience of God toward the poor, for example, is not limited to laws such as not harvesting to the edge of one’s field (Lev. 19:9-10). Such laws are not intended to be exhaustive in regard to how one might help the poor, but they reveal God’s heart for the poor. One is then free to serve the poor in innovative and creative ways that are not specifically “prescribed” by the law.

To read the New Testament as a highly prescriptive and regulative legal code not only transfers trust from Christ to us, but it also stifles creativity and innovation in the church. Moreover, this “legal” approach will demand conformity and result in strife and division since the “letter of the law” allows no diversity of practice or opinion. 

The First Commandment and American Idols

The first of God's Ten Commandments is "You shall have no other gods before me" (Exodus 20:3). Does this mean that it's okay to have other gods so long as we remember that Yahweh is top God? Is this a command to keep Yahweh first in rank--as with Zeus in the pantheon?

The command does not mean that Yahweh just wants to be top God, but that we are to affirm him as the only God. The Hebrew word translated "before" can be translated "against" or "beside." There are no other gods next to Yahweh. So God is actually saying that we are to have no other gods "in addition to" him.

Yahweh alone is God. He speaks his proper name in Exodus 20, distinguishing himself from all other gods. He has no divine associates. He is not the chairman on a board of deities. Yahweh alone is God.

So this command obviously prohibits idolatry. But that was an ancient problem, right? We're certainly too sophisticated to bow down to a statue. Is idolatry a problem today, in our modern society?

Not only have recent decades brought an influx of world religions and philosophies to our shores, but there are subtler forms of idolatry. Your God is whatever or whomever has top priority in your life. Your God can be identified by asking two questions: "How do you spend you time?" and "What do you do with your money?"

An idol is whatever we prioritize ahead of God. Among the most popular American idols are materialism, workaholism, entertainment, sex, family, politics, and sports addiction. Within this list are things in which many people place their trust or devote their free time. A good percentage of one's income may go into some of these categories. On this list are categories that quite often distract from a deeper commitment to church.

Idolatry is not just bowing down to a statue. Idolatry is loving or putting trust in something, or someone, above God. It is being preoccupied with anything above the Lord.

While the Ten Commandments are the foundation of all morality, the first commandment is first because it's the foundation of all the others. Rick Atchley has pointed out that "as our society's belief in God as Creator has declined, murder has become epidemic" (Sinai Summit, p. 139). This could also be said in regard to rampant violation of the other commandments. Have not adultery, theft, and rebellion against parents also reached epidemic proportions? Is it mere coincidence that as American society becomes more secular these sins become more prevalent?

People can't be consistently moral while disregarding the command to put God first. Any attempt at morality without God will be subjective and inconsistent---subject to change with the whims of a self-indulgent society. The standard for determining what is moral will be left to fallible humans who will never come to a concensus.

True morality must be grounded in a relationship with God. So as a prelude to the Ten Commandments, God says, "I am Yahweh, your God who brought you out of Egypt" (Exodus 20:2). So the commands are given in the context of a relationship---a covenant relationship with the God who redeemed his people. The relationship is established on the initiative of divine grace.

People won't be motivated to obey God until they are persuaded of his offer to extend merciful loving-kindness. Rules mean nothing apart from the context of relationship. So the gospel proclamation doesn't begin with what we must do, but with the announcement of what God has done for us in Christ. Transformation occurs, not as a mere attempt at adhering to the rules, but on the basis of entering a relationship. Only then do the rules start to make sense.         

Are the Ten Commandments Outdated?

Recent court battles have been waged over whether the Ten Commandments should be displayed on government property. Some Christians have dismissed the controversy as irrelevant, insisting that as Christians we're not under the "old law" anyway. So why be concerned about the legal code of a so-called former dispensation?

But the secularist agenda for retiring the Ten Commandments has nothing to do with our in-house dispensationalist controversies. Nor is the real agenda primarily a concern for separation of church and state. But the secularist agenda is the creation of a thoroughly secular America. This necessitates the removal of the Ten Commandments for they are the foundation of all morality.

Now is not the time (if there ever was one) for Christians to speak disparagingly of the Ten Commandments. They were not nailed to the cross. The indictment that accuses us as law-breakers is what was nailed to the cross. The Ten Commandments have perpetual abiding validity. The principles stated therein were in force before the Law of Moses and they are in force now.

These timeless principles served as a preamble to the law given at Sinai. These principles are explicated in the specific legislation that follows in Exodus 20:22 through Leviticus. These ten principles are of such foundational significance that they're the only part of the law that God spoke audibly to the assembly of Israel (Exodus 20:1). The Ten Commandments are truly the foundation of all morality.

Their timeless nature is evident when Paul speaks of the righteous requirements of the law being fully met in us (Romans 8:4). It is this law that Paul later summarizes as the rule of love (Romans 13:9-10).

So the Ten Commandments are not only foundational, but they are relational. The first four address love for God and the last six address love for neighbor. The commands are given in the context of a narrative concerning God's love for people. We love because he first loved us. God's use of his proper name, Yahweh, indicates that he does not command impersonal compliance with a generic god, but Israel's ethics grow out of a relationship with the God who reveals himself by name.

Prior to receiving the law, Israel is reminded of how Yahweh delivered them from Egyptian bondage (Exodus 20:2). This shows how grace always precedes law. Israel did not earn God's favor by law-keeping, but the law was given to a people already favored.

Law and grace are not mutually exclusive, but the giving of the law was itself an act of grace on the part of Yahweh. A community living by God's law is a community blessed with an increasing measure of peace and tranquility. Imagine a community that takes worship seriously and resists such temptations as adultery and thievery. Where God's law is embraced so is his shalom--the Hebrew word for peace, whose varied nuances include reconciliation, physical well-being, contentment, etc. But shalom is largely elusive in a secularist society.

The purpose of this post is not to argue for or against the public display of the Ten Commandments. It is a call for Christ-followers to affirm the primacy of these commands in our lives and worship. Should Christians care about the Ten Commandments? Absolutely!