Unfortunately many neglect the ancient Scriptures, thinking them obsolete. And unfortunately many no longer stress the importance of keeping the commandments, not understanding what it means to be delivered from the law. To correct these misconceptions I have written this article, which explains the differences between the old and new covenants and the reasons for these changes. I hope that this will show not only the meaning of those practices that have changed, but also the continuing importance of those commandments that remain unchanged.
There are several reasons why the law was changed:
I will now discuss these reasons.
Certain spiritual truths were hidden from those of antiquity. And God substituted earthly ordinances, which illustrated these truths in a symbolic way. (Hebrews 8:5) These teach of the glory of God, the atonement, and separation from evil. These were illustrated by the temple, sacrifices, and diet respectively, although the Jews under the Old Covenant did not understand all of this.
These ordinances may have served a secondary purpose at that time. Just as parents give little children tasks, to give the child a sense of accomplishment, so God instructed the Jews to keep certain ordinances. And while obeying such ordinances their mind was focussed on God, enabling them to experience fellowship with God.
And when they went to heaven following Christ’s resurrection, they would have understood the meaning of their actions. I will only briefly discuss symbolic meanings in this paper, as I discuss symbolism in other articles, as I deal with specific topics.
The temple had a room called the Holy of Holies, which symbolised heaven. (Hebrews 9:24) This was separated from the rest of the temple by a veil. (Hebrews 9:3) This symbolised that the way to heaven was not generally available in Old Testament times. (Hebrews (9:7,8) Within the Holy of Holies was a mercy seat overshadowed by cherubim. (Hebrews 9:5) This symbolised the throne of God in heaven. (Revelation 4:2,6-9)
Today the church is the house of God or temple. (1 Timothy 3:15) But we may learn lessons from the symbolism, such as, that God comes into the midst of His house, or church congregation when they gather.
The Jews were to sacrifice bulls and goats (Leviticus 16:9,11) and lambs (Leviticus 16:11) as sin offerings and the high priest was thus to make an atonement for them (Leviticus 16:11). None of these Old Covenant ordinances accomplished anything. (Hebrews 10:4) They were merely symbolic prophecies of the work of Christ as the Lamb of God (John 1:29) and our High Priest (Hebrews 9:11).
Now that Christ has fulfilled these prophesies, these symbols are no longer required. Of this transition it is written: when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me . . . He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. (Hebrews 10:5,9) But reading of such ordinances has educational value today.
Another example of symbolism was the twelve precious gems near the heart of the high priest (Exodus 28:29) and those which he bore upon his shoulders (Exodus 28:12). These represented the twelve tribes and were to be there as a memorial before God. This teaches us that all Christians are upon the heart of Jesus and He bears them up in prayer, thus keeping them in God’s mind. (Hebrews 7:25)
It would be wonderful to understand all the symbolism of such ceremonial law. The prophets of old did not fully understand, unto whom: it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into. (1 Peter 1:12)
Whether or not all sacrifices speak of Christ, I do not know, but they also speak of our duty to follow His example. Duties such as suffering reproach (Hebrews 11:11-13), praising God (Hebrews 11:15), and distributing wealth (Hebrews 13:15), are spoken of as sacrifices that we should make. Christ made such sacrifices and we are commanded to follow His example by taking up our cross.
Under the Old Covenant the Jews were prohibited from eating certain foods, such as snakes, which were called unclean. The apostle Peter was only taught that the literal interpretation of such laws was no longer relevant after the ascension when he saw a vision of unclean animals and: there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill and eat. But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. (Acts 10:13-15)
To understand the spiritual truth behind such laws, we can look at what God taught Peter through them. After the vision Peter said: Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean. (Acts 10:28) So the cleansing of foods corresponded to the cleansing of the Gentiles, meaning that they could be saved.
But it is understood that when Peter said that no man should be called unclean, he is speaking in terms of race rather than righteousness. Those who refuse to repent are still to be regarded as unclean. Paul wrote to the church, telling them: you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother, but is sexually immoral, or greedy, an idolater, or a slanderer, a drunkard, or an swindler. (1 Corinthians 5:11 NIV)
There is probably a simple correspondence of unclean foods to evil behaviour. A chameleon, which changes colour to suit its surroundings was unclean (Leviticus 11:30). Perhaps this speaks of those who have no principles and are afraid to be different from the unrighteous when they are in their company. The ostrich, which cannot fly was unclean (Leviticus 11:16). This may speak of the need to think about heaven, rather than only about this world (Luke 21:34). And so bible reading and prayer should not be neglected.
Some say that the dietary regulations were health related. But I do not agree, because if this were so, why did the law change with Christ rather than with modern hygeine.
There may be much symbolism that today we do not understand. Paul says that not muzzling the ox while it works (Deuteronomy 25:4) symbolises that church workers should be usually provided for, materially, by the church (1 Corinthians 9:9-11), although he did not take advantage of this, so he could be an example. This is probably only one of many examples of symbolism. It may not be until the next life that we fully understand all the symbolism of the bible. So, where the meaning of a symbol is not clear from the Scriptures, it is wise to be cautious when interpreting symbolic meanings, as such interpretations may be incorrect, as even some of my interpretations of dietary symbolism may be. Our primary faith must be based on certainty. Paul writes: Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is good that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein. (Hebrews 13:9)
Paul writes: the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. (Galatians 3:24) The Greek word for schoolmaster means the guardian responsible for the care and discipline of children within a household.
Children are subject to rules and punishments to which adults are not subject. This does not mean that adults can be bad, but rather that they decide for themselves how to be good.
Earthly punishments are discussed in the next section: Christ’s Kingdom Not of This World. This section focuses on rules, which I will define as being a prescribed means to an end, rather than the end purpose itself.
A rule might be not to point a gun at anyone irrespective of whether or not it is loaded. But the end purpose of the rule is so as not to kill. While Christians should keep sensible rules like these, and are also told to keep the rules of the law of the land (Romans 13:1-7) they no longer have to keep all the rules laid down for the Jews. However, the end purpose of those rules, namely the moral law of the Ten Commandments, is still just as important.
Sometimes the purpose of a rule is enforcement of a principle. With children it may be necessary to make rules, such as a time for homework. Otherwise some children would never do their homework. But older students should not need such rules, as they should recognise the wisdom of study.
In a sense the Jews were treated like children. As a Jew was born a Jew and had to obey God’s moral law irrespective of his own will, rules were needed so that his obedience could be supervised by man. A Christian adult, however, obeys God’s moral law primarily through fear of God rather than man. So less detailed rules are necessary.
This interpretation is consistent with Galatians 4:1-7 where Paul describes the transition from Judaism to Christianity at the time of the advent of Christ, saying: the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant . . . but is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father . . . But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son . . . to redeem . . . Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son. As sons, God can trust you, because your heart was changed when God: sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba Father.
A rule for Jews was to gather several times a year for feasts, such as the Passover, to remember the Lord (Leviticus 23). The Passover reminded the Jews of their deliverance from Egypt, and was also prophetic. This feast lasted for seven days, and on the first and seventh days they were to assemble unto God and do no work.
Although I believe, for reasons explained later, that Christians should still keep a weekly Sabbath; we are no longer required to keep other Sabbaths, assemblies, or feasts on the days specified in the Old Testament. Paul says: let no man therefore judge you . . . in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days. (Colossians 2:16)
But Christians should still assemble for the word of God and prayer at times other than the regular Sunday church service. Paul writes: Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more as ye see the day approaching. (Hebrews 10:25) So although the letter of the festival rules no longer applies the spirit remains.
Another Old Testament rule related to sexual abstinence during a woman’s monthly period. It is written: If a woman hath an issue and her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days. (Leviticus 15:19) And: thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness. (Leviticus 18:19)
This rule may have been to teach men respect for women, that they were not there to be only and always available for a man. (A woman’s desire is often less at such a time.) Although the letter of this law no longer applies the principle does in that both partners should consider the wishes of the other. Paul writes: The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. (1 Corinthians 7:4)
This Old Testament rule may also have been to give time for prayer and meditation upon the word of God. This principle also still applies. Paul writes: Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again. (1 Corinthians 7:5)
As Christians obey God from the heart, freedom from such rules is allowed; nevertheless, for the reasons given, the last rule may be a good one to follow. But more generally, Christians should still study such Old Testament rules, to learn their spiritual significance, that their obedience may be perfected. This is faith.
But as a child does not understand the purpose of many instructions, so the Jews did not. Their obedience to such rules was not through faith in their purpose. So of the ancient Jewish adherence to the guardian type rules, it could be said that: the law is not of faith. (Galatians 3:12) But this does not apply to the moral law of the Ten Commandments, to which obedience is an act of faith.
Sometimes freedom from the law refers to freedom from the moral law’s condemnation. But here I will discuss freedom from the obligation to keep the ceremonial law.
The church at Galatia thought they had to keep the Jewish ceremonial law. But Paul, seeking to correct them writes: how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain. (Galatians 4:9,10) We have been set free from the ceremonial law. Paul writes: Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. (Galatians 5:1,2)
Not that there is anything wrong with keeping any aspect of the ceremonial law, but only that it is wrong to trust in this for our salvation, as the ceremonial law is ineffective for this purpose. Paul writes: if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been given by the law. But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. (Galatians 3:21,22) Increased trust in the ceremonial law for justification, will decrease faith in the work of Christ; and so Paul tells the Galatians: Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law. (Galatians 5:4)
This was so serious an error in the early church, that when Peter, adhering to the ceremonial law, separated himself from the Gentile Christians, Paul rebuked him, explaining that: by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. (Galatians 2:16) But Paul was not referring here to the moral law.
Christian liberty is not from the restraints of the moral law. It is written: brethren ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh. (Galatians 5:13) To teach otherwise is so serious a heresy that it means disqualification from heaven. Paul writes: the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practise such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. (Galatians 5:19-21 NASB)
Jesus said to Pontius Pilate: My kingdom is not of this world. (John 18:36) This marks a change from Old Covenant law, when God’s kingdom on earth, the nation of Israel, was of this world. When Christ returns from heaven, He will establish His kingdom upon earth. But until then His words to Pilate are relevant us, when He said: If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews, but now my kingdom is not from hence. (John 18:36)
This means, for example, that complete obedience to the Sermon on the Mount, should not be imposed upon an unwilling nation by the church. But it is good if to some degree the law of the land reflects the will of God. But where it does not, it is not the role of Christians to join vigilante groups to wipe out sinners. The role of the church is to teach God’s ways and to exhort to obedience.
And so it is written that: the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. (John 1:17) The punitive element of the Law of Moses, as enforced by man, now plays a lesser role. This does not mean that God’s commands can be ignored, but rather that the motive for obedience is fear of God rather than fear of man. And God is gracious, giving men time to repent. Paul said: the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent. (Acts 17:30) And after men have repented they will believe in and obey the truth as taught by Jesus Christ, who also bore witness to the authority of many of Moses’ commandments. (Mark 7:10-13)
The apostle John was told not to be overly concerned about earthly enforcement of righteousness, by an angel who said: He that is unjust, let him be unjust still; and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still. (Revelation 22:11) Full justice must wait until Christ’s return. And He says: behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. (Revelation 22:12)
But although Christians do not enforce the law directly, they may advise governments to adopt wise laws. So although church and state should be separate, the church may seek to persuade the state. Even as the king of the Medes and Persians, after seeing the deliverance of Daniel: wrote unto all people, nations, and languages that dwell in all the earth: Peace be multiplied unto you. I make a decree, That in every dominion of my kingdom men tremble and fear before the God of Daniel. (Daniel 6:25,26)
We do not know how much of God’s law became the law of the Medes and Persians at that time. But we do know that God’s law to Israel was to be an example to the nations of a perfect system of justice, and that they would say: what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgements so righteous as all this law, which I set before you all this day? (Deuteronomy 4:8) This speaks not of Jewish rules but of the moral and civil law.
Apart from freedom of religion I do not see why any aspect of human behaviour should be exempt from law. No one argues that whether or not to steal should be left to the conscience of each individual. Because, say they, that stealing hurts other people. But all sin hurts someone. Either it hurts our neighbour or it hurts ourselves or it hurts God. If sin caused no harm, God would not call it sin. That some do not understand its harm, cannot be used as an argument for its legalisation.
Although the criminalisation of sin will not prevent it, it will deter it and prevent its promotion. When homosexuality was legalised in Australia, little did anyone realise, that before long, government propaganda missions into schools would be teaching children to accept it as a normal mode of life. How parents can sit quietly by while their children are thus indoctrinated is beyond me. Perhaps they don’t even care about their own children. Not only in schools, but also on television the government is funding the promotion of this pernicious evil as a normal lifestyle. It is bad enough for sin to be legal. It is even worse for it to be promoted.
But for disputes within the church, Christians should not take recourse to the law of the land. Jesus said: Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth: but I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. (Matthew 5:38,39) This was the Old Testament law of the land, which Jesus was thus cancelling within the church. Whether or not this is still a good law for the land is not commented on, but only that Christians should not take one another to court. (1 Corinthians 6:1-7)
In spiritual matters the eye of the Christian should not be upon an earthly judge but upon the Lord in heaven. Paul writes that: no man go beyond and defraud his brother in any matter, because that the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also have forewarned you. (1 Thessalonians 4:6)
Not only within the church, but even more particularly of spiritual matters without the church, Paul writes: Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; If he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good. (Romans 12:19-21) Paul is quoting from the ancient Scriptures, from Deuteronomy 32:35 and Proverbs 25:21,22 respectively. So the principle of loving your enemy and leaving judgement to God is not new to the New Testament. But because earthly punishments are not enforced by the church, this principle becomes more clearly separated from the enforcement of the law of the land.
There is still a place for judgement in the church, although of a different kind to that under the Old Covenant. I discuss this in my article on the ninth commandment: Thou shalt not bear false witness.
The civil law of Moses prescribed that in cases of theft, five oxen should be restored for an ox and four sheep for a sheep. (Exodus 22:1) But today only a very small percentage of thefts involve sheep or oxen and their character is likely to be of a different nature to that in Old Testament times. A modern theft is more likely to involve a computer than a sheep. Nevertheless, the principles on which the civil law of Moses was based should not be forgotten.
The health laws of Moses in Leviticus 13,14 prescribed many regulations to prevent the spread of leprosy. And other regulations were to prevent other diseases. Today advances in antibiotics, immunology and hygiene may allow some modifications to such regulations. But I believe it likely, that the health laws of Moses contain much wisdom that is still useful to us. For example the physical removal of germs by discarding a contaminated vessel or rinsing it with water (Leviticus 15:12), even if in association with disinfecting, is better than relying on disinfecting alone, as such reliance can breed resistant strains of germs.
Christ has taken the curse and this includes that of being a slave. And so it was prophesied that Christ would: bring out the prisoners from the prison. (Isaiah 42:7) And if Paul says to Christians: if thou mayest be made free, use it rather, (1 Corinthians 7:21) Christians should give liberty to each other.
This has particular application to the betterment of women. Under the Old Covenant it was allowed that a woman could be sold against her will to be a concubine or servant wife. But under the New Covenant this is not allowed. So the advent of Christ improved the status of women so that now: there is neither male nor female. (Galatians 3:28)
The reasons for the imperfect laws of concubinage were practical, and necessary only because of the hardness of men’s hearts. (See Matthew 19:8) God knew that men would exploit women in those days and sought to control the practice rather than to eliminate it. But it is now possible for women to obtain freedom from such exploitation because the words of Christ, His example and the promise of a heavenly reward have inspired men to think not only of themselves.
Jesus explained (Matthew 19:3-6) from the book of Genesis 2:24 that concubinage was not instituted at the time of creation but only marriage, and that only this is perfect. So, although some temporary concessions were given to the Jews, the Old Testament still points to God’s perfect way.
The abolition of this concession makes the law of Christ more stringent than the Law of Moses in this matter. I cannot think of another cancelled concession like this. If there were, I think the Lord Jesus would have told us. So the remainder of the moral law remains the same. Solomon writes: Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. (Prov 30:6) And where possible, interpretations of commandments should be sought that preserve continuity between ancient and modern Scriptures as God says: I am the Lord, I change not. (Malachi 3:6)