Let's Study the Scriptures Together

There are many within Christendom who claim to be “Torah observant.” Some do so out of a sincere desire to be pleasing to God. Others have adopted a more divisive approach. They tend to look down on those who are not Torah observant. There are some who would say you must keep Torah (the Hebrew word for “law”) to be saved. There are others who deny that Torah observance is mandatory for salvation but still view it necessary for sanctification. There will be a number of posts about this topic but today let’s focus on the issue of the Law of Moses being rendered inoperative.

Rom 7:1 Or do you not know, brethren (for I speak to those who know the law), that the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives? 
Rom 7:2 For the woman who has a husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives. But if the husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband. 
Rom 7:3 So then if, while her husband lives, she marries another man, she will be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from that law, so that she is no adulteress, though she has married another man. 
Rom 7:4 Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you may be married to another—to Him who was raised from the dead, that we should bear fruit to God. 
Rom 7:5 For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death. 
Rom 7:6 But now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter. (NKJV)

When a husband dies, the wife becomes a widow and is no longer bound to the law of the husband. She is free to remarry without committing the sin of adultery. This passage is not Paul’s teaching on divorce and remarriage. He is using an analogy between the believer and the Law. This becomes evident when you look at verse 4, which begins with “therefore.” The application is that Christ has died, and now the believer is also dead to the law. One is either married to the Law or to the Messiah but cannot be married to both! The “oldness of the letter” (verse 6b) is clearly a reference to the Law of Moses. Paul devotes the entirety of Romans 7 to show the futility of trying to be saved or sanctified by the Law. Let’s look at the next passage.

Rom 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. (NKJV)

The Greek word for “end” here (telos) means “termination” or “conclusion.” This means that the Law is not the source of righteousness for salvation. The same is true in regard to sanctification. The new means of righteousness is clearly defined. The condition of justification and sanctification is belief in Christ!

Gal 3:19  What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. (NKJV)

The Law had a definite purpose. Many Torah observant believers accuse others of denigrating the Law because we refuse to put people under its yoke. But at this point, I simply want to show that Paul explains the temporary aspect of the Law. Notice Paul says the Law was “added?” It was added to what was already in effect (the Abrahamic Covenant). It served the function of showing what was sinful. Once the promised “Seed” should come, it was no longer necessary. The reference to the “Seed” is obviously the Messiah (Gen 3:15, Gen 22:18).

Gal 3:24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 
Gal 3:25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. (NKJV)

The Law was a “tutor” (the KJV opted for “schoolmaster”) to bring us to Christ. The duty of the Law was to bring us to Christ. To use the Law in any other fashion is to use the Law “unlawfully” (see I Tim 1:7-11). The goal of the Law is to show us our need for a Savior and ultimately be justified by faith! Once that has occurred, we are no longer under a tutor (or schoolmaster). Since the Law was the tutor, it is clear we are no longer under the Law!

Eph 2:14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 
Eph 2:15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, (NKJV)

There is much more to be said about all of these passages, but we are focusing on the temporary function of the Law. With that being said, Paul makes it clear that the “middle wall of separation” (the Law) has now been broken down. God gave a vivid visual depiction of this when He tore the veil of the curtain from the top to the bottom (Matt 27:51). In the context of Ephesians 2, he is talking about the separation that once existed between Israel and the Gentile nations. The Law served as a middle wall of partition or separation. The dietary laws alone made fellowship within the two groups virtually impossible. However, the death of the Messiah abolished (that’s strong language!) the enmity produced by those commandments and ordinances. To insist that believers must observe those commandments now is, in essence, rebuilding the wall that God tore down! Or to use the curtain analogy, “sewing the veil back together.”

Heb 7:11 Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? 
Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. (NKJV)

Those who claim we are still under the Law have a real problem. The Old Testament predicted that a new priesthood would come about and that the Messiah would be a priest after the order of Melchizedek (and not Aaron!). This was prophesied in Psalm 110:4. This would not be allowed under the dispensation of the Law of Moses! To be a priest one had to be from the tribe of Levi. The Law allowed no exceptions. So, the Old Testament prediction (Psalm 110:4) already gave a clue to the temporary nature of the Law. This new priesthood required a change in the Law (something Torah observant folks vehemently deny!).

Heb 7:18 For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, 
Heb 7:19 for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God. 

The language here is unambiguous and inescapable. The “former commandment” is obviously the Law. It was annulled (the KJV says “disannulling”, but the meaning is the same).

Heb 8:13 In that He says, “A NEW COVENANT,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. (NKJV) 

Here, the writer of Hebrews is referring to Jeremiah 31:31-34 which predicts the New Covenant. To quote Jewish scholar Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, “thus the Law of Moses became old with Jeremiah and vanished away with the Messiah’s death.”

2Co 3:3 clearly you are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart. 
2Co 3:4 And we have such trust through Christ toward God. 
2Co 3:5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, 
2Co 3:6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. 
2Co 3:7 But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, 
2Co 3:8 how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious? 
2Co 3:9 For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory. 
2Co 3:10 For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. 
2Co 3:11 For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious. (NKJV)

This passage will zero in on the part of the Mosaic Law that most Torah observant people want to cling to: The Ten Commandments. We know the Ten Commandments are in view because of the phrases “tablets of stone” in verse 3, and “engraved on stones” in verse 7. Paul pulls no punches by calling them “the ministry of death” in verse 7 and “the ministry of condemnation” in verse 9. There is a lot to unpack here, but we are focusing on the temporary nature of the Law. Thus, we come to verses 7 and 11 which speak of the Law “passing away.” The Greek word translated as “passing away” is katargeo in Greek. The word means to “abolish”, “cease”, “do away”, “make void”, etc. In the context of this article, we might opt for the phrase “to render inoperative.”

In contrast with that, we have the New Covenant (or the “Law of Christ”) which will never pass away. Thus, it is deemed superior. Or, to use Paul’s language in verse 11b, “what remains is much more glorious.” No doubt, such talk about the Ten Commandments makes some people very uneasy. But we must remember that in some way, nine of the Ten Commandments are restated in the New Testament (or “Law of Christ”). The exception is the Sabbath command, which has been the subject of other articles, and we will discuss in greater detail. Now let’s examine a passage of scripture that is foundational to most Torah observant believers.

Mat 5:17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 
Mat 5:18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 
Mat 5:19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 
Mat 5:20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.” (NKJV)

People will use this passage to try and negate every shred of evidence you have been presented with thus far. They will emphasize verses 17 and 18 as proof that the Law is in force because Jesus says He did not come to destroy the Law and that “one jot or one tittle” will not pass till all is fulfilled. But let’s examine this under the proverbial microscope. They will almost always ignore verse 19 and the reference to the “least of these commandments.” Most so-called Torah observant believers that I have encountered focus on only a few aspects of the Law. This is not universal, but emphasis usually centers around a handful of issues. There is emphasis on saying the Name of God properly (usually insisting that God’s Hebrew names must be used). There is emphasis on the Levitical dietary laws (no pork, shellfish, etc.). There is an emphasis on keeping the Sabbath (which biblically speaking is from sundown Friday to sundown on Saturday). There is an emphasis on keeping the Jewish Feasts (Leviticus 23) and an opposition to all so-called “man-made” holidays (some going as far as to label them as “pagan”). Doubtless there are other points of contention, but these tend to be the most common. There is very little emphasis on the “least of these commandments” that Jesus makes mention of.

But to remain consistent, any discussion of Matthew 5:17-20 must include all contextual issues. In the context of Matthew 5:17-20, the whole Law of Moses is in view. When Jesus Christ mentions relaxing the “least of these commandments” in verse 19, this is clearly referring to all 613 of the Mosaic Laws (not just the Ten Commandments or Sabbath laws). Further, Jesus said that He came to “fulfill” the Law and the Prophets. The Greek word for “fulfill” is pleroo. The same word is used in the first chapter of Matthew’s Gospel:

Mat 1:22 So all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: 
Mat 1:23 “BEHOLD, THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD, AND BEAR A SON, AND THEY SHALL CALL HIS NAME IMMANUEL,” which is translated, “God with us.” (NKJV)

Matthew is quoting from the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14. When the Virgin Birth took place, that prophecy was fulfilled. That means the prophecy has come to an end. It can’t be fulfilled again in the future. The prophecy was accomplished and brought to an end by fulfillment. The point Matthew is making is that Christ did not come to abolish but to fulfill the Law. It must also be noted (and this is crucial!) that these words were spoken during His earthy lifetime while the Law was still in effect! The Law did not end with the coming of the Messiah, but with His death! That rendered the Law inoperative (the entire book of Hebrews deals with this issue).

Most Torah observant folks realize that much of the Law no longer applies (when was the last time you stoned your rebellious teenager in accordance with Deuteronomy 21:18-21?). In order to hold on to the handful of “mandatory” laws from the Torah, they are forced to divide the Law in various ways. One way is to separate the Ten Commandments from the other 603. Those who are most adamant about Sabbath-keeping often adopt this approach. Others will divide the Law into three separate categories: ceremonial, civil, and moral. This camp will state that the first two categories (ceremonial and civil) have been done away with, but the moral law still remains. Within both groups, they will claim that the Sabbath command is part of the moral law. With a little critical thinking, we can refute both lines of objection.

In the first place, the Bible never makes such distinctions or sub-categories of the Law. The Law is always treated as a singular unit in the scripture. Even the language of scripture makes this plain. When the Bible makes reference to the Law (in Hebrew or Greek) it is always in the singular. The Hebrew word for law is Torah, and the Greek word for law is nomos. Both nouns are singular. Greek scholar Douglas Moo makes the following observation:

“Of Paul’s 119 uses of nomos, none occurs in the plural. . .. This statistic should be regarded as significant: Paul discusses the law as a single entity rather than a series of commands.’ Therefore, if the law is an indivisible unit, it follows that there is a certain “all or nothing” quality about it. This understanding of the law as a unit is supported by at least three New Testament texts [Mat.5:19; Gal. 5:3; Jas.2:10.” (Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. Be. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996)

Jas 2:10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. (NKJV)

Note that James sees the Law as a unit and keeping it as an “all-or-nothing” proposition. This underscores the principle of the unity of the Mosaic Law. To put it simply, if you break a civil law, you are breaking the ceremonial and the moral law. If you break a ceremonial command, you’re also breaking a civil and moral command. James was the Lord’s half-brother and the leader of the Jerusalem church. We see him presiding over the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 where it was determined that Gentiles did not have to keep the Law of Moses (Acts 15:24). So, to see his perspective on Torah observance is quite informative. There simply is no biblical basis for dividing the Law into three separate categories. Those who do so, have gone beyond what is written to support their agenda.

Before we conclude this discussion on the moral aspects of the Law, let’s examine the relationship with moral commandments and the Torah. By definition, moral laws are those eternal principles of God which reflect His nature. It is true that these moral laws did not terminate with the death of the Messiah. But it is also true that they did not originate with Moses at Mount Sinai! Adam and Eve violated moral law prior to Moses. We can go back even further than that and see that Satan violated it even before our first parents! Moral law is not synonymous with Torah or with the Ten Commandments. No doubt the latter two contained the moral law of God but it did not originate with them. There was a period of time from Adam to Moses that lasted around 2500 years. During that time period, adultery was wrong, murder was wrong, stealing was wrong (you get the picture!).

Since the Sabbath commandment seems to be one of the most controversial, we will end our discussion on that topic. The question we must answer is, “is the Sabbath command moral or ceremonial?” Most Torah observant believers will insist that the Sabbath command is a moral issue. Hence, those who don’t observe Sabbath are considered “lawless” (or “immoral” if indeed it is a moral obligation!). There are some who insist that we must go to a place of worship on Saturday (the Seventh Day Adventists mostly adopt this position). To do so, is actually a violation of the Sabbath day command. In the Law of Moses, the Sabbath was not a day to travel to church/temple, it was a day to remain at home and rest. The Sabbath synagogue services did not commence until after the Babylonian exile.

The Sabbath is not a moral command, however. This can be illustrated in the following way. Something that is immoral is always wrong. Murder, stealing, adultery is wrong no matter what day it is committed. However, the things that were forbidden on the Sabbath day (kindling fire, gathering of wood, traveling, etc.) were permitted to do on other days. This clearly demonstrates that the Sabbath was far more ceremonial than moral.

There is a strange irony that I have observed regarding the Torah observant movement. The vast majority of its adherents are Gentiles, to whom the Mosaic Law was never given in the first place. To be fair, I must admit that although no believer is beholden to the Law of Moses, Jewish believers were/are still free to observe the Law, if they so choose. The problem comes when it is presented as mandatory for salvation and/or sanctification. There can be no mixture of Law and Grace!

(Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum’s book “The Sabbath” served as primary reference material for this article. You can order it here: https://ariel.org/product/the-sabbath/)