Did the Law Really Pass Away ( expire ) at the Cross?
The problem, as I, and most Christians see it, with the whole notion of universal salvation, the idea that everyone is 'saved', no matter how they live their lives, is that it removes our responsibility, not only to respond to the Gospel, the Law of Love, but, as I was involved in a discussion with some universalists lately, that it relegates Love to a warm feeling, and even a commitment, of sorts, thumbing their noses in the face of such statements as Paul's in his letter to the Romans; 'love is the fulfillment of the law' ( Romans 13:10 )!
Jesus Himself told His listeners, 'Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill' ( Matthew 5:17 ). Much of the confusion, I believe, comes from our modern definition of 'fulfilled' ( 'prophecy' is another such ). The archaic definition given by the online Merriam-Websters dictionary, is simply 'to make full', but a more modern definition is, 'to bring to an end'. In the context of Jesus' words above, especially about not coming to destroy; we should be able to clearly see that He came to fill up up, or establish the Law, not to bring it to an end! You may hear the phrase a lot, 'the law passed away at the cross', I mean, Jesus Himself 'nailed it to the cross' ( Colossians 2:14 ), right? Well, true enough, but besides the fact that we must take into account the context of Paul's words; let's also look very carefully at how Paul phrased this statement! We know from history, that Jesus was nailed to the cross on Calvary, where He bore the sins of His people, but notice how Paul turns this phrase to say that it was the law that was nailed to the cross, and that it was Jesus who nailed it there!
It is often said ( speaking of catch-phrases ); 'it's all about Christ', and indeed it was ( and is ), but as I've said before; I'm not sure that any of us, and especially modern American Christians, really 'get' the full impact of that statement! When Jesus was finally and fully revealed to be the Christ of God, in fact, God Himself, when He came 'in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ' ( II Thessalonians 1:8 ), He showed, not only that He was God Himself, for we can read in the Hebrew Scriptures that it was God who revealed Himself in that way ( Lamentations 2:3, etc. ), but He was the fulfillment of all of biblical history, for 'these are they which testify of Me', as He told the Pharisees, as recorded in John 5:39. He was, in fact the culmination, 'the beginning and the end', of biblical, eschatological history, but, just because He is that, doesn't mean that history, or the bible itself, is no more; it just means that Jesus brought in the fulness of it!
The Law
Having established that the Law is in effect, and by this, we mean the 'law of love' ( as it is often called ) that Jesus spoke of in summation of the ten commandments that God gave through Moses. In this summation, Jesus told His audience, 'You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind', and 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself'; on these, He said, 'hang all the Law and the Prophets'. The question might now be asked; 'do we still have the law and the prophets?' Some would no doubt object to this line of questioning, responding quickly that we do not, for they passed away with the coming of Christ ( whether you believe it was at the cross or in AD70 ). One has only to remember the covenantal context of Scripture, that it is a record of God's dealings with His covenant people, which people we are, to see that, while it is true that we no longer labor under the yoke of the Mosaic Covenant, or suffer under the sin and the death of Adam, these Scriptures are there for our instruction in righteousness, and thus are very applicable to us today: as they reaped the consequences, good or bad, of their actions under the first covenant, so also under the New. No more must we suffer separation from a just and holy God because of the sin of Adam, but we still, when we disobey His Word, and commit acts of disobedience against His Law, suffer the natural consequences of those actions. As Paul wrote, 'whatever a man sows, that he will also reap'!
Here's another question, and one which those who profess a belief in universal salvation would quickly disavow; must we keep the Law in order to be saved? Clarification seems to be the order of the day here ; how is the Law to be kept under the New Covenant, we've basically covered what is meant by, 'the Law', under the New Covenant, but what does it mean to be 'saved', under the New Covenant? I have discussed, in previous articles, what, from my understanding, most modern American Christians mean by the phrase 'to get saved', or even, using biblical language, which some Christians still do, to 'Be saved from this perverse generation', in total disregard, of course, for the covenantal and historical context of Peter's statement, and the relevance that his words would have held for those to whom he spoke.
Obviously, then; the term 'saved' really does not hold quite the same connotation for the people of God today, as it did under that first covenant, for they were being saved from the sin and the death of Adam, whereas we ( post-AD70 ) were not born under that curse, but were born into the life and freedom of the New. Here is where we could get into a sticky situation, because if we are all born into the lively freedom of the New Covenant, wouldn't that technically mean, in that sense, that all are ( have been ) 'saved'?
Universal Salvation, or Universal Reconciliation?
Most of us are probably more or less familiar with all the proof-texts that universalists like to pull out to prove that Christ died for all, as He is 'the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe' ( I Timothy 4:10 ). Once taken, read, and understood in the above-mentioned contexts, much of the confusion, if not all, can be cleared up, when it is understood what the Gospel writers had in mind when they used such terms as 'all', or 'any' ( (II Peter 3:9 ). Here again, though, within the covenantal context of these words; can we truly say that they are not at all applicable to us?
Are all men saved? That is questionable, and in the sense that we bandy the word about, today, the sense of a decision that men and women ( yes, children too ) make, a decision to 'follow Christ in the waters of baptism', and to 'deny himself, and take up his cross daily'; I believe the answer would definitely be a resounding 'No'! There is no question that there is a decision to be made, and that we must agree with, we must keep the terms of God's Covenant in order to receive the blessings ( salvation? ) of that Covenant, but even though some do not obey the Covenant, and thus do not reap the blessings, but rather the cursings ( yes, I said 'cursings'! ) of the Covenant; I believe that all men are, by virtue of their very birth, born into covenant with their Creator!
It could be said, then, in that sense, that all men have been saved, as biblical salvation was from the sin and the death of Adam, but that all men, though they have been reconciled, have not yet reconciled themselves, for whatever reason, with that reconciliation. Some might call this position 'middle knowledge', though it is no doubt better, and more aptly described elsewhere. The Scriptures, Paul in particular, tell us that we are 'God’s fellow workers' ( I Corinthians 3:9 ), as N. T. Wright put it so well, 'He has enlisted us to act as His stewards in the project of creation'. We do not 'save' ourselves, nor are we predestined for an eternity in 'heaven' or 'hell'; the choice, as I've written before, is up to us: will we live our lives according to the 'Law of Love', keeping, observing that Law, not only in our inmost of 'hearts', but shining forth that Love through our actions, and reaping the benefits of our obedience, or will we disregard that Law, not keeping Him or His Words, and reap the natural consequences of our sowing?
May we ever make the right choice, keeping the Law of God, and sharing His Love with all we come in contact with, living and working in covenant community to make this world, which is after all 'Our Father's World', to live up to it's reputation!
Charles Haddon Shank
'
4 comments:
Good article Charles
Thank you, David: blessings to you, brother!:)
I am a gentile, and the Law was given to Jews. The law was never given to gentiles and it is ever a puzzle to me why gentiles would ever want to think of it as something pertaining to themselves, especially when James points out how hopeless life is under it, when he says that to break one law means to break them all. In fact when Paul is trying to explain the lostness of all mankind, he has to resort to an entirely different explanation for the Jew as compared to the gentile as seen in Romans 1 & 2. But even if I were a Jew, Hebrews seems very clear as to how the first covenant which included the Law, was faulty, (Hebrews 8:7) for which reason it was entirely annulled and replaced with the second covenant (Hebrews 10:9), because as perfect as the Law itself was (Psalm 19:7) it made everyone who lived/lives under it imperfect (Heb 10:1 & Heb 7:19) Not so?
Perhaps there is a scripture that might help me understand when Gentiles were required to be Law observers especially in light of Ex 34:28 & Deut 4:13 which appear to link the old covenant and the commandments together inextricably? Deut 4-13 He declared to you his covenant, the Ten Commandments, which he commanded you to follow and then wrote them on two stone tablets. & Ex 34-28 Moses was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights without eating bread or drinking water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant the Ten Commandments.
First of all, Don, you are not a Gentile! Paul said that there is no more Jew or Gentile ( distinction ). The Jews were the ( old covenant ) people of God, and though they were judged for their iniquity ( covenant-breaking )there was a remnant saved. That remnant, together with those formerly seen as outside the covenant ( Gentiles )formed the Church. As Jesus showed in Matthew 22:40 when He summed up the Ten Commandments, the Law itself was not abrogated, but only that part ( contained ) in ordinances was removed so that the enmity might vanish.Hebrews 8:8 says that God formed the covenant anew because He found fault with THEM ( Israel ), NOT because He found fault with the Law. As you correctly noted, the Law is perfect, converting the soul. This is why God became Man, in order that He might fulfill the Law for us, and now through us, as we love our God and our neighbor as ourselves.
Post a Comment