Brad's Blog: GRACE THROUGH THE AGES

GRACE THROUGH THE AGES HANDOUT UNIT #7

By: Bradley Anderson

THE COVENANT WITH MOSES

MOSES AS AN ADVANCEMENT OF THE COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM

In Abraham we asked the question: what would Abraham have done with a civil, moral and ceremonial law code? How would he have managed it all?

The administration of the Law was beyond even Moses’s ability as one man.

70 elders of Israel went up the mountain with Moses (Ex 24).
The burden of leading Israel was too great for Moses, so God consecrated 70 elders to help him (Num 11).
God appointed the tribe of Levi to manage the ceremonial aspects of the Law.

The conquest, occupation and rule of the land would be the task for Abraham’s progeny after him.
Nehemiah 9:7–8a states:

[7] You are the LORD, the God who chose Abram and brought him out of Ur of the Chaldeans and gave him the name Abraham. [8] You found his heart faithful before you, and made with him the covenant to give to his offspring the land of the Canaanite.

Abraham’s heart before God is the example for all believers. A significant aspect of Abraham’s role was in walking before God as the model for his children to follow. This involved exemplifying all the same character qualities that would be required of the generations that would conquer and occupy the promised land, as a benevolent nation, 400 years later. These qualities included:

faith in God,
faithfulness to the covenant that God gave them,
as we have already observed:

the heroes in pagan lore gradate from mythological to historical figures; it is hard to delineate where pagan myth ends and historicity begins.
whereas the heroes in Hebrew lore are historical; they are ordinary men and women, whose lives adumbrate:

foreshadow and symbolize what it is to be God’s chosen people.
The heroes of the Hebrew people exemplify the role and identity of the Hebrews in God’s redemptive plan.

Interestingly it is worth noting here that the Hebrews, as a people, may be seen as adumbrating what it is to be chosen of God for all the people of the world.
Sadly the Hebrew people will provide negative examples of how to be God’s chosen people more often as not. 1 Corinthians 10:[6] Now these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did.

When the Exodus Reader is reading about Abraham, they are essentially reading about themselves; they are walking in the footsteps of their father Abraham; his pilgrimage is inspirational, instructive and paradigmatic of the challenges that the Exodus Readers will encounter in their pilgrimage toward land and rest.
The Bible is more than a dogmatic manual.

The Bible provides stories of real people that the reader relates to. The reader makes more sense and more meaning from the principles in the Bible by the examples of the principles being lived out by ordinary people who are as human as the reader.
In this the reader is elevated to the lofty principles in the Bible by the examples of real people.
All this is to convey the amazing fact that our common lives are intended for elevation to something higher.
We have already seen this in the first covenant mediator Adam, who was not made for the fall and death but for eternal life.

This is key even from a NT perspective. When NT readers hear the stories of the saints in the Apostolic age, they are learning about themselves and how they are to live. In Paul’s last writing, to his successor Timothy, Paul says: 2 Timothy 3:[10] “You, however, have followed my teaching, my conduct, my aim in life, my faith, my patience, my love, my steadfastness,”

Abraham was promised that his seed (progeny) would become a nation, but he did not see it in his own lifetime. The Exodus began with God remembering the covenant with Abraham. This establishes continuity between the covenant with Abraham and the covenant with Moses.

Exodus 2:23–25 [23] During those many days the king of Egypt died, and the people of Israel groaned because of their slavery and cried out for help. Their cry for rescue from slavery came up to God. [24] And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. [25] God saw the people of Israel—and God knew. (ESV)

The movement in redemption history from Abraham to Moses may be understood as an advancement of the covenant first made with Abraham. The covenant of Moses will advance the covenant with Abraham by moving the land, seed and blessing promises, given to Abraham, forward.

From the standpoint of seed, the intervening 400 years have advanced the promise to Abraham, in spite of the most difficult circumstances in Egypt. The 70 members of Jacob’s household are now many thousands, despite Pharaohs attempts to control their population by infanticide.

Deuteronomy 10:22 [22] Your fathers went down to Egypt seventy persons, and now the LORD your God has made you as numerous as the stars of heaven.

When the Exodus reader was taught the story of Creation, we can be sure that he was deeply moved by the story of Adam. Imagine how they might have reacted when they heard that the very first words spoken by God to Adam were words of blessing, and that the blessing entailed fruitfulness and dominion! The significance of those words would have excited anticipation for the promised land; the land “flowing with milk and honey”. They would have surely thought “in Egypt we were not fruitful; in Egypt they killed our children; in Egypt we were slaves, but Moses is teaching us that God wants us to have our own land; a place where we can be fruitful; a place where we can have dominion…..this is what the creator God wants for us!”

The Promised Land can be understood as a restoration movement in the direction away from the corruption that came into the world through sin; a movement back to “as it was in the beginning.” The Promised Land restores the land & rest blessings that were first given in Eden.

God said “go away” from Eden after Adam sinned. In the call of Abraham God said “go to” the land I will show you. Sending Adam away was an act of grace, to prevent Adam from taking from the Tree of Life and living forever in a state of sin. Calling Abraham back was also an act of grace. God is moving His people back to Edenic qualities of blessing. God is giving them land and rest. Interestingly, we can see in our own time that a people without land are a people without rest.

On every government owned reservation for indigent people groups in the world, we find people living in poverty and misery. The Human Rights Commissioner of Australia convinced the Australian government to give the land back the Aborigines and they have risen out of poverty. The connection between land and rest is inexorable. We will see this developed in the Year of Jubilee laws.

Eden was also a sanctuary, and in Moses we will see the reestablishment of sanctuary in the designs for the tabernacle. What indication do we have that Eden was a sanctuary? Meredith Kline speaks directly to this question:

“Reflecting the identity of Eden as a sanctuary, was the priestly responsibility assigned to man to guard the garden from profanation (Gen 2:15). The sequel underscores this. When man forfeited his priestly role, guardianship to the holy site was transferred to the Cherubim (Gen 3:24). They were the guardians of the heavenly temple throne and the extension of that function to Eden accents the identity of this earthly spot as a visible reproduction of the temple above.”

From the standpoint of land, the laws that are given to Moses are customized for a people who will:

conquer, cleanse and occupy a region that is inhabited by wicked people, (the land of the Cannanites)
and rule benevolently over a vast geography of surrounding lands (from the Nile to the Euphrates).

From the standpoint of blessing we will see that Israel is:

given the privilege of worshiping the God who dwells among them,
flourishing in a land of their own,
serving as the exemplary and beneficent nation to other nations, showing that God cares about all the nations of the world, not only Israel.
showing the nations the one true God and how He is to be worshiped, just as their father Abraham had, when he interacted with the very same people groups around Canaan.
The high watermark of the promises to Abraham will be during the reign of King David and David’s son Solomon.

1 Kings 4

[20] Judah and Israel were as many as the sand by the sea. They ate and drank and were happy. [21] Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the Euphrates to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt. They brought tribute and served Solomon all the days of his life.

[25] And Judah and Israel lived in safety, from Dan even to Beersheba, every man under his vine and under his fig tree, all the days of Solomon.

[29] And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding beyond measure, and breadth of mind like the sand on the seashore, [30] so that Solomon's wisdom surpassed the wisdom of all the people of the east and all the wisdom of Egypt.

[34] And people of all nations came to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and from all the kings of the earth, who had heard of his wisdom.

It is noteworthy that the author of Kings is speaking of the apogee and height of OT Israel in the geographical terms which were first spoken to Abraham in Genesis 15.

With reference to the west - east geographical orientation, 1 Kings states that “Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the Euphrates (west) to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt (east).” It is my sense that this speaks of fulfillment of the first half of the land promise to Abraham in Genesis 15:18–21.

[18] On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, “To your offspring I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates, [19] the land of the Kenites, the Kenizzites, the Kadmonites, [20] the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, [21] the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites and the Jebusites.” (ESV)

With reference to the north - south geographical orientation, 1 Kings states “and Judah and Israel lived in safety, from Dan (north) even to Beersheba (south), every man under his vine and under his fig tree, all the days of Solomon.” This also, seemingly, fulfills the second half of the land promise to Abraham in Genesis 15:18–21

The land promise to Abraham encompassed two distinct regions:

a region of people groups that would be judged for a wickedness that traces to the curse in the toledot of Noah, and removed from their land for Israel to dwell in,
and a region of people groups that would not be removed, but subject to the rule of Israel.

This might be symbolic of what God is teaching the world in redemptive history.

God is going to judge the wicked people of Canaan by removing them and giving their land to His chosen people. From this the nations take notice that the God of Israel judges wickedness.
God’s chosen people are then going to rule the land around Canaan, with justice and righteousness. From this arrangement the nations can come and be blessed by the good and wise rule of Israel and perhaps desire that the same God should rule their nation. Perhaps these nations might even rule with kindness over the lesser nations that they were in treaty with?
The land promise entailed 1) exodus-judgment-conquest and 2) beneficent reign. Together these two operations reflect some key aspects of who God is and who His people are.

God is both just and merciful.
His people are what we might call victorious servants; they are being equipped by God to defeat the domain of darkness as He wills it, even as they are simultaneously being equipped to serve and to exemplify His righteousness. This is all part of His design to bless His whole creation.

It will be vital for God’s people in every age to trust and obey God, so that they will be instruments of blessing. God will bless them in the land that He is going to give them, and through their statecraft in the region, they will bless their neighbors with a rule that is righteous and just. This is consistent with the Abrahamic promise of blessings for the whole world (Genesis 12:1-3).
The positive impact of Israel in the wider world rests in large part on God’s promise covenant, but also in the covenant obligations that Israel has to God. (see unit 1, Royal Grant Covenant, page 5-7)

It is fitting, at this juncture of the covenant with Abraham, that God gave Israel the laws that they will need to bring the land, seed and blessing promises to Abraham toward fruition. It makes perfect sense that God waited until this juncture to give the Law to Israel, under the leadership of a second covenant mediator, Moses, rather than all in one installment in the time of Israel’s patriarchal covenant mediator Abraham.

GRACE ADVANCED IN ATONEMENT

It is important to recognize that before the Law was given at Sinai, that there was already a divinely revealed law in place.

There were some laws of God that were evident everywhere prior to Moses.

On his way back to Egypt, Moses got into serious trouble for not circumcising his son. (Ex 4:24-26)
On the way to Sinai, the Jews got into trouble for not keeping the Sabbath. (Ex 16:22-25)
The Tower of Babel episode demonstrated that all the people of the earth were consciously disobeying the will of God in not “filling the earth”, but instead concentrating their powers on the plains of Shinar, “lest we be dispersed.”
Abraham offered a tithe to the priest king Melchizedek. (Gen 14:17-21)

Before the Law, people even recognized that sin created the need for atonement sacrifices.

Job showed remarkable understanding in the need for making sacrifices to atone for the sins of his own children.
It is notable that the pagans had evolved toward a corrupted concept of sacrifice. The pagans made offerings to feed their gods (who could not feed themselves). The idols served as portals for the pagans to be seen by their gods as they fed them. Think of the idol as like an ATM with a camera and it sees you as you make your deposit. The idol was there so that you got credit for your offerings. The favor that they earned by feeding their gods was for such things as good crops and fertility.
We recognize that good crops are a gift of God’s common grace. God made this explicitly clear in His covenant with Noah when He promised to preserve springtime and harvest. But the pagans attributed the good crops to the effectiveness of their cultic rites. Their cultic system seemed effective, because rain would come naturally to them, albeit by the common grace of the God that they did not recognize and properly acknowledge. In Romans chapter 1, Paul will teach that they were without excuse.

Romans 1:19–23 [19] For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. [20] For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. [21] For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. [22] Claiming to be wise, they became fools, [23] and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

In contrast, the ceremonial Law in Moses will bring a much greater clarity to the purpose of offerings to God. The sacrifice system is not for earning God’s favor, but

principally for atoning of sin in mandatory blood offerings,
and for expressions of homage, gratitude and fidelity to God in voluntary grain and blood offerings.

The pagans had national gods, family gods and personal gods.

In Moses there is one God who receives five different offerings, each touching the lives of the people in all the various ways that are comprehensive of their national and individual existence.
Of the five offerings, three are for sin and two are for homage, gratitude and fidelity to God.
The homage sacrifices are a way of showing love of God. Love of God is not simply a feeling of affection for Him, but more importantly love is a decision of loyalty to God.

The giving of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20) and the Book of the Covenant (Exodus 21-24) are followed chronologically by the giving of the specifications for the Tabernacle (Exodus 25-30). This is very significant!

First the laws were given for teaching them how to identify sin.
Second, a sacrifice system was given for washing away sin.

“The Law did not leave Israel in a state of sin, with no way of remediation.”
Granted, there were categories of sin that we must acknowledge as beyond redemption:

acts of murder and child sacrifice.
acts of necromancy, blasphemy, Sabbath breaking, cursing God, encouraging others into idolatry.
rebellion against parents.
various sexual deviations.

As I have labored in previous units to demonstrate that there is one covenant of Grace which overarches all of redemption history, the reader has perhaps anticipated this point in the history of redemption when Moses gives laws so severe in their punishment that grace seemingly retreats in God’s posture toward His people; that the covenant of Moses is somehow of a lesser quality than other covenants which are more gracious. The one strike and you're out aspect of these laws argue against the proposition that grace was active through this period of history. The violators of these laws would forfeit their very lives and therefore, so it is reasoned, the covenant with Moses is not gracious. But this understanding of Moses must be analyzed thoughtfully:

In contrast to Moses, Jesus in the New Covenant, will come to the defense of the woman caught in adultery; He will dine with prostitutes, indicating that adultery does not place one beyond redemption in the NT. And so it is reasoned that the NT is gracious and Moses is punitive. But it must be noted that Jesus will also command the forgiven adulteress to “go and from now on sin no more”. Jesus is instructing her not to use her forgiveness as a license to continue in adultery.
One must note that the OT atonement for sins were typological of the “once and for all” sacrifice of Christ in the NT (Romans 6:10). As typological pre-enactments of the cross, the OT sacrifices had to be repeated every day; they did not carry a “once for all” efficacy, but a temporal daily efficacy. Subsequently the sacrifices did not have the power to wash away the sinful nature that we inherit from Adam; they only had a temporal efficacy to atone for the sins that were committed out of one’s sinful nature, and in the limits of the time since one's previous atonement sacrifice.

Understand that punishment and condemnation of sin is not on our sinful nature but on the sins which are committed because of our sinful nature.
If condemnation was for our sinful nature, then infants who die before accepting Jesus as savior are automatically condemned, even before they have consciously sinned out of their own will.

As we saw in our study of Adam, Christ will come as the “second Adam” to atone for all of our sins and for the sin nature we inherited from Adam (Romans 5).
In this study we will see that the OT atonement system had sacrifices for sins as they were committed (the sin offering and the guilt offering) and for the sin nature in the people (the burnt offering). But the various offerings were repeated daily because they were only provisional until such time as Christ would come to offer Himself up “once and for all” as the Lamb of God.
To clarify, this is not to say that the renewal benefits that were available in the OT daily atonement for sin are unavailable to the NT believer. The NT believer experiences daily renewal through confession of sin. And regular observance of the Lord’s Supper has a renewal benefit for our devotional life.
All of this is to labor this point: in an OT system of readily available daily atonement, there had to be a distinction made for the sins that have a highly destructive effect on society. We must keep in mind and not lose sight of the fact that the OT atonement system was also functioning in organic harmony with a civic system that safeguarded Hebrew society.
At this time in redemption history the three strands of the Law (moral, civil and ceremonial) were like a braided rope, in that the three strands could not be separated or isolated; they are best understood as one organic strand that worked together for the whole.

Had there been a system of sacrifices for such things as acts of murder, sexual deviancy, or overt blasphemy, the social fabric of Israel would have been corrupted as in the days of Noah.
One can imagine what it would be like if people contemplated murder on one day, knowing that there was a sacrifice system that would grant them forgiveness on the following day. This would have had the effect of encouraging rampant violence.
Similarly, families would have been compromised if there had been a system of atonement sacrifices for being pardoned for such things as cheating on your spouse.

We have already seen in Noah that God’s preservation covenant was for protecting the seed of the woman as the carrier of the gospel through the ages.
If the families are not protected, the gospel will be lost to succeeding generations. There is always a remnant in redemption history and the remnant is essentially familial through every disclosure of redemption history through all the ages. Even now, in NT times, 95% of the believers in the world come from Christian homes and the transmission of redemption continues to pass on familial lines.
God does not see humanity as a snapshot from one moment in time, but as multiple generations in symbiotic relationships. The health and welfare of one generation rests very much on the positive behavior of previous generations and overlapping generations.

Also the cultic life of Israel would have been undermined by a system of atonement sacrifices for such sins as necromancy and idolatry. We will see that the integrity of the priesthood and the holy order of the ceremonial law was held to the highest standard; it had to be because it was patterned after Heavenly realities!
The health of the closed Hebrew society would have been compromised by the diseases that follow from sexual licentiousness and deviancy.

In the NT system, there is forgiveness for the sins which were unredeemable in the OT, but the NT clearly states that it is impossible to continue in these sins as an authentic NT believer.

1 Timothy 1:8–11 [8] Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, [9] understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, [10] the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, en-slavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, [11] in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted. (ESV)

Those who commit these sins are not barred from redemption in the NT, but if they continue in those sins we must question the authenticity of their redemption.

1 Corinthians 6:9–11 [9] Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, [10] nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. [11] And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (ESV)

Paul says that some of the people in Corinth were guilty of these sins, formerly, but the behavior in these sins does not continue after being justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. So it would appear that the genuine believer does not continue in the unredeemable sins.

The NT church is penetrating the pagan people groups with the gospel. At the NT stage of redemption history the civil law system of Moses would have been impossible to implement. The Apostolic teaching to the church does not even seem to anticipate a day when it will be in authority over the civil laws. In either case, the sins that brought death on the OT people were looked on with serious disapproval in the NT. But the penalty of sin was not limited in the NT church. The NT church must censure those who practice these sins from fellowship in the church.

The NT version of stoning is to be censured from church membership.

2 Timothy 3:5–9 [5] having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people. [6] For among them are those who creep into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and led astray by various passions, [7] always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth. [8] Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men corrupted in mind and disqualified regarding the faith. [9] But they will not get very far, for their folly will be plain to all, as was that of those two men.

The book of Hebrews (8-10) will quote from Exodus to highlight that it was essential for Moses to get the specifications of the Tabernacle perfect, because:

they were a copy of the Heavenly reality that had always existed.
they were a copy of what Christ would enter as our ultimate Priest.
All this points to redemption of sin, as a heavenly design that was made before time. In Handout 2 we noted that some 17th century Protestant theologians had considered adding a theological Covenant of Redemption to their confession of faith.

Theodore Beza (1519-1605) noted that the Vulgate, translated by Jerome (382 to 405), had used the latin term dispono or “appoint” to render the Greek diatithemai in verse 29 of the original Greek text of Luke 22:28-30.
Dee-ah-tith-e-me. “Diatithemai” is the verbal form of covenant.
Beza translated Jesus as saying: I will covenant to you thrones, just as my Father has covenanted to me a throne.
Is Jesus referring to the obedience that he had to the will of the Father as covenantal? Some of the early Protestant theologians thought yes!

The son was obligated to the Father’s will before His earthly mission.
The Father rewards the Son for His obedience.
The Holy Spirit is sent by both the Father and the Son to regenerate the hearts of the chosen and to help the chosen in their mission of spreading the gospel to the nations.
The mutuality in these intratrinitarian arrangements are strikingly covenantal!

Geerhardus Vos (Princeton Seminary 1892-1932) illustrated how the book of Hebrews shows us that the Law came down as a copy and shadow of the Heavenly reality and that Christ came down in the substance and the form of the Heavenly reality.

The Apostle Paul will teach that all the administrations of redemption history connect to the eternal plan of redemption that originated from heaven.

Ephesians 1:7–10 [7] In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, [8] which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight [9] making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ [10] as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.

Abraham precipitated the covenant with Moses; now it receives further clarification and advancement in the covenant with Moses.

Sin and atonement are given further clarification.
God’s people are also being moved one step closer to Christ and to the Heavenly reality that Christ will come to manifest, not in shadow or copy, but in actual substance.
The advancement of the grace that was first shown and offered to Adam (Gen 3:15) is bringing the people of God into a greater understanding of Christ, the promised one who will “crush the head of the serpent.”

The story of the giving of the law at Sinai teaches all generations to think of God from two distinct but complementary perspectives of grace: Nearness and Fear-ness.

In Exodus 29:44–46 God says of Israel:

[44] I will consecrate the tent of meeting and the altar. Aaron also and his sons I will consecrate to serve me as priests. [45] I will dwell among the people of Israel and will be their God. [46] And they shall know that I am the LORD their God, who brought them out of the land of Egypt that I might dwell among them. I am the LORD their God.”

This is nearness.

In Exodus 19:10–20 God instructs Moses to have the people cleanse themselves and to set limits for the people to keep their distance from His presence. This is fear-ness.

Exodus 20:18–21 [18] Now when all the people saw the thunder and the flashes of lightning and the sound of the trumpet and the mountain smoking, the people were afraid and trembled, and they stood far off [19] and said to Moses, “You speak to us, and we will listen; but do not let God speak to us, lest we die.” [20] Moses said to the people, “Do not fear, for God has come to test you, that the fear of him may be before you, that you may not sin.” [21] The people stood far off, while Moses drew near to the thick darkness where God was. (ESV)

Moses says that the fear of God is good for the people, because fear helps them that they “may not sin.” This is going to illustrate the balance between God as descending to be near and God as revered and feared.
We get indications of this same tension between nearness & fear-ness in the NT.

1 Corinthians 11:27–32 [27] Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. [28] Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. [29] For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. [30] That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. [31] But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged. [32] But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world.

Paul says that “if we judged ourselves, we would not be judged.” The God of NT is the same God as the OT. He is near to the NT believer, but He is also to be revered if not feared by the NT believer.

In Exodus 24:3–8 we come to the ratification ceremony of the covenant of Moses. The covenant with the people of God is ratified with blood. It is significant that the congregation is consecrated to the covenant by blood in a ritual that is similar to when Aaron and the priest’s are consecrated by the sprinkling of blood. The congregation is brought near to a God in this rite of consecration. They are not going to be relegated to a passive posture in their worship of God, or as mere spectators of the mediatorial office of the priesthood, but as active Covenanters with God. This is nearness!

Exodus 24:6–8 [6] And Moses took half of the blood and put it in basins, and half of the blood he threw against the altar. [7] Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read it in the hearing of the people. And they said, “All that the LORD has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient.” [8] And Moses took the blood and threw it on the people and said, “Behold the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance with all these words.”

God promised that He would dwell among them. The burnt offerings and sacrifices with the blood sprinklings show the fearfulness of God, but in the promise that “we will do all the words the LORD has spoken” the people show that they are in a relationship of trust with God. He is fearful; He demands a sacrifice for sin, but He is nearful and He may be trusted. We will do all that He has spoken, knowing He is good and that He wants what is best for us.

“Aslan is a lion- the Lion, the great Lion." "Ooh" said Susan. "I'd thought he was a man. Is he-quite safe? I shall feel rather nervous about meeting a lion"..."Safe?" said Mr Beaver ..."Who said anything about safe? 'Course he isn't safe. But he's good. He's the King, I tell you.” C.S. Lewis, Narnia.

LEVITICUS

The book of Exodus will end with the building of the tabernacle. The book of Leviticus will pick up from here to describe how the Priest is to carry out his duties at the tabernacle. The sacrifices are instructive of how a people of God relate to Him.

THE BURNT OFFERING

Leviticus chapter 1 gives instruction for the burnt offerings for the people:

It was called a burnt offering because all of the animal sacrifice was completely burned, whereas we will see in other offerings, part of the sacrifice is taken by the priest and part is taken by the person who is offering the sacrifice.
It was also called a food offering to the LORD, because the aroma was pleasing to the LORD. In other cultures of this period, the offerings were thought to be food for the hunger of the gods that they made their offerings to. For instance, in the Gilgamesh Flood epic, the sacrifice that is performed after the flood waters subside is a feeding frenzy of multiple gods hovering over the fire, because they had gotten really hungry during the flood!
It was performed by individuals for their own individual sin.
It was performed by the priest for the entire nation.
The Individual would bring various animal sacrifices for the approval of the priest.
They would lay their hand on the animal and then kill the animal, symbolizing the transfer of their sin.
The priest would then sprinkle the blood of the animal on the sides of the altar.
The priest would burn the entire animal on the altar.
The priests were instructed to maintain a continual flame on the altar so that the atonement that was made from the burnt offering would be continual.
The idea of the burnt offering was to pay the price for sin. It was to make appeasement to the LORD for sin.
The burnt offering points toward Christ and His atonement work, in making propitiation for sin.
The burnt offering was not for a specific sin, but for the sinful nature of the one bringing the offering. This offering was rich in doctrinal instruction; it showed them that they have a sinful nature that needs atonement.
The smoke from the fire was continual and it would have reminded everyone in the camp of the sinful nature that the burnt offering was atonement for.
The burnt offering made it possible for the people of Israel to dwell with God. This is a beautiful expression of God’s grace. The fire, the aroma and the ever present smoke rising up in the camp would have been a constant reminder of the fact that the Priests have mediated the acceptance of the people with God. They are acceptable to God by virtue of the burnt offering.
It is noteworthy that this offering was continual in the OT, but that Jesus answers finally and completely for our sinful nature in the NT.

Leviticus 6:8 - 7:38 gives separate instructions to the Priests for the burnt offerings:

The Priest is instructed to keep the fire burning continually. “It shall not go out.”
The Priest is given specific instructions for dealing with the ash pile that is produced by the continual duty of the altar.
The continual burning on this altar made it possible for Israel to encamp with the LORD.

THE GRAIN OFFERING

The Grain Offering was offered as a stand alone offering, or as an addition to the burnt offering:

It was a gift to express reverence and homage to the LORD.
It was comparable to the gifts which would have been brought by vassals to suzerain kings.
It is a tribute and a statement of fidelity and loyalty.
It is a product of labor.
It was demonstrating that our work and the fruits of our work are owned by God. Everything that we have is His because we are His loyal subjects.
There was no honey or leaven added to the grain offering. This was not something that you would eat. But it was seasoned with frankincense as a symbol of its costliness.
It was seasoned with salt as a symbol of the enduring nature of our fidelity to God.
The sense of this offering is to demonstrate that everything we have is the LORD’s, but He is only asking us to bring this small part as a symbol of His right to keep it all.

THE FELLOWSHIP OFFERING

The Fellowship Offering was also called the Peace Offering.

It was a meal that included meat of a sacrificed animal.
It expressed health and blessing and peace.
The best part of the offering is burned for the LORD, part of it is kept for the Priest, and then the family which is bringing the sacrifice to the altar keeps the rest and they sit down and have a picnic from it.
The idea with this offering is you are celebrating God’s blessing. You might be bringing the fellowship offering in gratitude for something God has done in your life.
Or you might be marking a vow that you are making with the LORD by this offering. And you might invite your friends to participate.
This is a simple sacrifice of praise for the goodness of God.
The NT makes allusion to this offering in Hebrews 13:15–16 [15] Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. [16] Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God. (ESV)
The NT makes another allusion to this in Romans 5:1 [1] Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. (ESV)
Praise is not often associated with the reality that we have peace with God, but that is one way that we are able to relate to the Fellowship Offering. When we sing praise we are celebrating the fact that we have peace with God.

THE SIN OFFERING

Interestingly the sin offerings are nuanced to the point of such specificity that there are four different grades of offering required depending on who is doing the sinning. For example:

If the Anointed Priest sins a bull from the herd without blemish is sacrificed. Leviticus 4:3 [3] if it is the anointed priest who sins, thus bringing guilt on the people, then he shall offer for the sin that he has committed a bull from the herd without blemish to the LORD for a sin offering. (ESV)
If the whole congregation sins a bull from the herd is sacrificed. Leviticus 4:13–14 [13] “If the whole congregation of Israel sins unintentionally and the thing is hidden from the eyes of the assembly, and they do any one of the things that by the LORD's commandments ought not to be done, and they realize their guilt, [14] when the sin which they have committed becomes known, the assembly shall offer a bull from the herd for a sin offering and bring it in front of the tent of meeting. (ESV)
If a leader of the congregation sins a male goat without blemish is sacrificed. Leviticus 4:22-23 [22] “When a leader sins, doing unintentionally any one of all the things that by the commandments of the LORD his God ought not to be done, and realizes his guilt, [23] or the sin which he has committed is made known to him, he shall bring as his offering a goat, a male without blemish, (ESV)
If one of the common people sins a female goat without blemish is sacrificed. Leviticus 4:27 [27] “If anyone of the common people sins unintentionally in doing any one of the things that by the LORD's commandments ought not to be done, and realizes his guilt, [28] or the sin which he has committed is made known to him, he shall bring for his offering a goat, a female without blemish, for his sin which he has committed. (ESV)
The degrees of sin are atoned for by the highest grade of sacrifice when a member of the Priesthood sins. The next grade of sacrifice is atoned for when the congregation sins. Then the next grade of atonement is when a leader sins, and lastly the lowest grade of atonement is for when a common person sins as an individual. When a member of the priesthood sins that is more serious than when a leader sins. And interestingly it is more serious when the congregation sins, then when the leader sins.
The grades of atonement suggest that a congregation can sin. The fact that a congregation can sin is instructive this way: sin can be expressed in the aggregate. The imputation of Adam’s sin is all encompassing, extending beyond the individual to the community. In my opinion this sacrifice is practical from an inter-tribal perspective.

One can easily imagine scenarios wherein one tribe is culpable for disobedience while the other tribes are not. Yet the entire congregation of tribes must bear the burden of sin because they are united as one nation.
One can easily imagine how coming forward as twelve tribes to sacrifice for the sins of one tribe would have had the effect of humbling and uniting the tribes in very meaningful ways. But I need to do much more study on this issue.

In the NT we do not teach corporate guilt. Jeremiah 31:29–30

[29] In those days (the New Covenant days) they shall no longer say:

“‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes,

and the children's teeth are set on edge.’

[30] But everyone shall die for his own iniquity. Each man who eats sour grapes, his teeth shall be set on edge. (ESV)

THE GUILT OFFERING

The guilt offering makes restitution to someone that you have wronged, plus it adds 20% to the value of what was lost.
The guilt offering does not allow you to make atonement for your sin by bringing an offering and walking away from the fault of your sin or the damage that it has done to another.
The restitution for the sin must be made on the day of the offering. Restitution cannot be drug out; there can be no lapse between the time you make your offering and the time you have made restitution. In the story of Zacchaeus we read that he made fourfold restitution to everyone he had wronged.
Jesus has this in view when he instructs His disciples to come to terms with their accusers quickly and with integrity (Matthew 5:23-26) lest they find themselves “liable to the council.” The NT does not release believers from restitution of their wrongs towards others.

PRIESTLY CONSECRATION AND HOLINESS

In chapters 8-10, Leviticus tells the story of the consecration of the Priesthood. For the people to be holy they will need mediators who are holy. The consecration service for the Priesthood involved sacrifices.
After the consecration ceremony had all gone well and Aaron’s sacrifices were acceptable, there soon arose a terrible situation.

Leviticus 10:1–3 [1] Now Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, each took his censer and put fire in it and laid incense on it and offered unauthorized fire before the LORD, which he had not commanded them. [2] And fire came out from before the LORD and consumed them, and they died before the LORD. [3] Then Moses said to Aaron, “This is what the LORD has said: ‘Among those who are near me I will be sanctified, and before all the people I will be glorified.’” And Aaron held his peace. (ESV)

The incident involving Nadab and Abihu might be explained by the fact that the covenant was fresh; one might note that it is generally in the beginning of an institution that God is most severe in His punishment of compromised principles and standards of holiness, e.g. Ananias and Sapphira, Achan. But we cannot overemphasize the fact that rituals which were performed at God’s tabernacle had to be executed with holiness at all times. Think of Uzzah being struck dead for touching the Ark (2 Sam 6:7). This gives us a better appreciation of the verse in Hebrews which says:

Hebrews 4:14–16 [14] Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. [15] For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. [16] Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need. (ESV)

Our confidence in approaching God is based on the perfection with which Christ modeled the OT priesthood standards of holiness. Perfection had to be required of the priesthood because it was the means of access to grace and as already stated, the tabernacle was a precise model of heavenly realities.

In Leviticus, Moses gives the standards for day to day holiness, involving purity, hygiene and diet. The study of this section of the Law will not be taken up here, but in summary we may say that the keeping of these laws would have had the practical effect of truly setting Israel apart from pagan people and practices. We see the practical consequences of this in the story of Peter in Acts 10 when he is being called to go to the house of the Gentile Cornelius.

Acts 10:9–16 [9] The next day, as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the housetop about the sixth hour to pray. [10] And he became hungry and wanted something to eat, but while they were preparing it, he fell into a trance [11] and saw the heavens opened and something like a great sheet descending, being let down by its four corners upon the earth. [12] In it were all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air. [13] And there came a voice to him: “Rise, Peter; kill and eat.” [14] But Peter said, “By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.” [15] And the voice came to him again a second time, “What God has made clean, do not call common.” [16] This happened three times, and the thing was taken up at once to heaven. (ESV)

It is clear from this story in Acts 10 that a genuinely devout Jew would find it impossible to intermarry or to even socialize in the homes of non-Jews.
These observances would have had the secondary benefit of isolating Israel from pagan influence and keeping them holy and free from the corruption of paganism.

THE FEASTS

In Moses there are seven annual Feasts which served as holy convocations.

Leviticus 23:1–2

[1] The LORD spoke to Moses, saying, [2] “Speak to the people of Israel and say to them, These are the appointed feasts of the LORD that you shall proclaim as holy convocations; they are my appointed feasts.

The phrase holy convocation is used to describe the assembly of people for sacred observance. The Feasts were events that occur every year to connect the seasons of nature with holiness.

THE THREE USES OF THE LAW

The 17th century confessional statements of the Protestants understood that the law given by Moses served three purposes for the Jews. These are easy to remember with the acronym P P P.

Police - as a restraint of evil. The law of Moses is expansive of the laws that God had already enacted through Noah for the restraint of evil. Western civilization continues to benefit from these laws.
Prosecutor - The law convicted the Jews of their sin. In the NT the Holy Spirit brings conviction of sin to us. John 16:8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment.
Pastor - The law guided and helped the Jews to know what pleases God. This is why Paul can say in Romans 3:31: "Do we then overthrow the law by faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law." Paul saw that the law had pastoral value even in the NT age, because it shows you who God is and what pleases him.

The Free Grace movement rejects the utility of the OT for the NT church.
But, have you ever noticed that the NT says very little about such key issues as social justice and worship, just to name a few? This is because the Bible is one book. The NT authors didn’t need to write about many key issues for the church because they were already written about in their bible. 2 Timothy 3:16–17 [16] All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, [17] that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. Here Paul is referencing the OT scriptures as “profitable.”
The NT church existed for many years with the OT as their primary source of revelation. One of the oldest catechesis that we have in full form, The Demonstration of Apostolic Teaching, was written by Ireneaus in the middle of the second century and it quotes extensively from OT scripture pointing to Christ. The church was deep into the second century and it was still very much dependent upon the OT for it’s didache (doctrinal teaching).

The second use of the law (prosecutor) is thought by some evangelicals to be primary for driving us to grace by overwhelming us with a bar that is set so high that no one could ever measure up. But let us remember that the law was given to people who were already redeemed. What purpose of redemption would be served in overwhelming them as a means of driving them to God, when they have already been brought to God by His promise to their father Abraham?

The book of Exodus is bifid, or split into two parts.
Part one is deliverance.
Part two is the giving of the law.
The segue from part 1 to part 2 is in Exodus 19:1–6.

Exodus 19:1–6 [1] On the third new moon after the people of Israel had gone out of the land of Egypt, on that day they came into the wilderness of Sinai. [2] They set out from Rephidim and came into the wilderness of Sinai, and they encamped in the wilderness. There Israel encamped before the mountain, [3] while Moses went up to God. The LORD called to him out of the mountain, saying, “Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the people of Israel: [4] ‘You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to myself. [5] Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; [6] and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words that you shall speak to the people of Israel.” (ESV)

Sinai is not meant to convey the idea that “if you will live this way, then I will love you.”
Sinai is better understood as saying “I have delivered you and brought you to this place, now live this way; I have delivered you and brought you to this place, so that you can live this way.”
The way that God wants people to live, requires separation from the corruptions that are brought into the world by sin and by the serpent. God brought His people out of Egypt to deliver them from oppression and to separate them from the sin and corruption that would send them back into oppression if they were not broken free from it.
The Law was not given to drive the sheep to the shepherd, or so that the shepherd could rub the face of the sheep in their failure. It would be more accurate to say that the shepherd went out and rescued the sheep and brought them to a place where they could be pastured. The Law then is both the substance of their pasture and the means of keeping them in the pasture.

Psalm 1:1–2

[1] Blessed is the man

who walks not in the counsel of the wicked,

nor stands in the way of sinners,

nor sits in the seat of scoffers;

[2] but his delight is in the law of the LORD,

and on his law he meditates day and night.

Theonomists think that:

there are not three categories but only two categories of law:

moral/civil combined
ceremonial

They believe that the moral/civil law in the Old Testament is still binding in the NT.
NT believers must obey the Ten Commandments and even work politically for their implementation in government.
Theonomists believe that if a law isn’t explicitly repealed in the NT it still stands.

Dispensationalists differ. They hold that if a law isn’t explicitly repeated in the NT, it does not stand. In my opinion the dispensational view is the better rule of thumb on this question.

THE COVENANT WITH MOSES AS LAW TREATY

In the Introduction we learned the 20th century archaeological discoveries opened up a new field of scholarship on ancient treaties. The two types of Hittite treaties that existed at the time that Moses wrote the Pentateuch included:

Royal Grant Treaties

Sworn by the greater to the lesser.
Meredith Kline developed the theory that the covenants with Abraham and David were Royal Grant treaties because God is the one swearing the oath in each of these covenants.
These are unilateral in nature and therefore they are thought to be unconditional.

Suzerainty Law Treaties

Sworn by the lesser (the Vassal) to the greater (the Suzerain).
These are bilateral and therefore they are thought to be conditional.
Kline understood the covenant with Moses to be a suzerainty law treaty because Israel is swearing the oath.
The constitutive parts of the Suzerainty Law Treaty includes:

Preamble identifies who is in the covenant. The Bible identifies God as the suzerain over Israel as his vassal. “I am the Lord your God….”
Prologue gives the background of how the suzerain Lord and vassal came together. “…..who brought you up out of the land of Egypt.” The first 19 chapters of Exodus can be seen as Prologue.
Stipulations are the actual rules of the treaty. In the ancient suzerainty treaty these are the bulk of the treaty document. This includes an “as for me, as for you” aspect.

The Hittite treaties did not have very much “as for me” language compared to the covenants between God and Israel.
Interestingly, the ancient suzerainty treaties did not include guarantees of dynastic succession, whereas in the covenant between God and David we will see that God is guaranteeing that the throne will pass from father to son for perpetuity.

A greater nation might enter into a treaty with a lesser nation, in which the lesser nation is under contract to render tax and tribute in return for protection and the benefit of trading with the greater nation.
But the greater nation would generally not stipulate, in the terms of the treaty, any guarantee that the heir of the vassal king will automatically ascend to his father’s throne by right of the treaty.
This is hugely significant and instructive of our understanding of the differences between the ancient near east nation treaties and covenants between God and Israel:

In the covenant with David, God will guarantee the dynastic succession of David.
In the covenant with Moses there are guidelines for the future King of Israel which state that the king’s fidelity to the law impacts the longevity of the king’s rule and the future rule of his children, but the succession is not guaranteed explicitly in Moses (Deut 17).
In our study of David we will see that the covenantal guarantee of the Davidic throne succession is the means of God entering into the human side of the covenants to bring about the fulfillment of all the covenants of the OT and the NT.
If we remove the obligation side of the covenants, then we in effect isolate ourselves from grace. For it is the work of Christ as a covenant keeper that makes grace effective for God’s people through all the ages.
When OT scholars, of the discontinuity view of OT/NT are pressed to explain how OT Jews obtained their salvation, they will universally affirm, along with the scholars who hold to a continuity view of OT/NT, that the OT believers are saved by faith in Jesus Christ.
For salvation to reach backwards and forwards in both directions of history, past and future, from the center of history, Jesus, the son of David, needed to fulfill the vassals obligation to the OT covenants with Israel. This explains how God can keep His unconditional promises to Abraham, while simultaneously holding Israel to its obligations to Him. What you have then in the covenants of Abraham, Moses and David is a progression of covenants all working together under the promise of one overarching covenant of Grace.
“The law is not able to bring to consummate fruition the promises made to Abraham, because in order to bring them to fruition you need a crucified ascended seed of Abraham who is a second and last Adam.” But that said, now you need a covenant of dynastic succession that brings the Messiah into the world as the son of man who is also the Son of God. (We will study this in David).

Sanctions are the carrot & stick of the treaty; the blessings and curses.

The Neo-Assyrian treaties, which came hundreds of years after the historical Moses, did not have blessings.
Interestingly, the differences in the sanction language between the Hittite and Asssyrian treaties suggests that Moses was written, not as the liberal critical scholars suggest, during the time of the Neo-Assyrians (9th-6th century), but in the 14th century, during the time of the Hittites and the historical Moses.

Witnesses - God is the witness, the people are the witnesses, Heaven and earth are witnesses.

The Hittites called this “the god list.”

This would be an extensive list, reflecting that the pagans were calling upon their national gods to act as witnesses of their treaties.
In this section of the Hittite treaties the gods were called upon to bring down their own curses upon any noncompliance with the stipulations.

In Deuteronomy 30 the covenant with Moses is renewed at Moab with a witness.

Deuteronomy 30:19–20 [19] I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live, [20] loving the LORD your God, obeying his voice and holding fast to him, for he is your life and length of days, that you may dwell in the land that the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.”

The terms “heaven and earth” are probably being used as a merism.

As a merism it is playing on the polar opposite of “heaven and earth” in the same way that “east and west” or “north and south” would work to encompass totality. As a merism it would be saying that “the whole cosmos, is witness to this covenant.”
As a two realm witness of the covenant it would be saying that the beings in both the supernal realm of heaven and the natural realm of earth are all witnesses. The covenant is then an intersection between the rule of God from Heaven over His people on the earth. It is then saying that from His supernal throne, God’s covenant is witnessed both by Himself and by those who surround His throne, even as it is witnessed on earth. As we are given glimpses into Heaven by Isaiah and John we see a picture of the heavenly court of beings around the throne. A two realm view of the witness clause would indicate that these beings are witnesses with God to His promise.

The witness component of Moses will continue quite strongly through the NT covenant. When we move to the final unit study on the NT we will see that that are four key terms to understanding the NT message:

Kēryssō, translated as “preach” and as “proclaim.” Think of John the Baptist and of the Angels in Luke chapter 2, each coming as heralds of the Christ.
Euaggelion, translated as “gospel.” The OT prophet Isaiah actually coined this term using the Hebrew “basar” which the KJV translates as “good tidings.” The Septuagint (250 BC) translated “basar” as ”euaggelion.” The NT authors use the same term. The concept of gospel is truly an OT prophetic idea that understands Christ’s arrival as the glad tidings of Kingdom restoration. The OT prophets probably did not understand the kingdom as a work in progress, but the gospel that they had in view was fulfilled in the inaugurated sense when Christ was born.
Didache, translated as “teach.” This is not another way of describing preaching. Preaching is heralding the kingdom. Teaching is concerned with the doctrinal implications of the kingdom.

Mat 9:35 And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people.

Martyria, translated as “witness” or “testimony.” John emphasizes this more than the other NT authors. The witness in the NT is not unlike the witness in the OT. The NT witness is truly functioning in a legal procedure. One personal “testimony” is rightly understood as pointing to the great covenantal event of Christ. Edmund P. Clowny states that “In the making of a covenant, witnesses are essential to attest the validity of the engagement against any future misrepresentation.” The NT believer amazingly stands as a living testimony and witness to the NT covenant.

Documentation. The tablet clause specified that documentation of the treaty would be kept in the temples and read periodically.

Interestingly, Moses is said to have come down from the mountain with “two tablets” (Exodus 31:18). This could mean that a) the law had two parts, b) the law didn’t fit on one tablet, or c) the people had their copy and God had His copy in the Ark.
The tablet clause would have involved the priesthood in the custodial care of the law. This was common even in pagan nations. The priesthood of the pagan nations were responsible for preserving the treaty and bringing it out to be read periodically.
In the time of the monarchy, the kings also had their own handwritten copy of the law (Deuteronomy 17:14-20).

This is significant because it reflects the progress of grace as it is transitioning from priestly oversight to Kingly oversight. This is another point of continuity between Moses and David.
The keeping of the physical copy of the law in the temple signifies that the priesthood is involved in the administration of the law. But when the king is instructed to make his own copy of the law during the age of the monarchy, it shows that the administration of the law is now partly the responsibility of the King. This is why we see the concentration of prophetic activity centered around the monarchs. The prophets are covenant prosecutors sent to hold the Kings accountable to the Law.
In this movement from priestly oversight to the inclusion of kingly oversight, the people of God are being prepared to receive a priestly King. In the covenant with David we will see that this is all pointing to Jesus! Jesus will be both Priest and King.

The problem with Meredith Kline’s proposition that God made two kinds of covenants with Israel, one with Abraham as conditional and the second with Moses as unconditional, is in its reduction of Moses to a set of stipulations whereby a theocratic Israel may exist as a nation. The historical books do not seem to reflect that kind of contracturality between God and Israel. In the covenant with Adam, Adam only had to sin once and he was cast out of the garden, but the kind of contracturality that is reflected in the historical books are rather more like an extraordinary prenuptial agreement that reads accordingly:

If you (Israel) should cheat on me, then I (the LORD) will still love you.
If you cheat on me I will forgive you.
If you cheat on me I will make a way for you to be reconciled to me.
If you persist in your cheating and you refuse my forgiveness and reconciliation, then we will be separated for a time (exile).
But, I will bring your children back to the land and I will wait for them to avail themselves of the reconciliation that I offer.

WHAT DOES THE TERM OLD TESTAMENT MEAN, DOES THE COVENANT WITH MOSES CONTINUE IN THE NT?

I have labored to show that all the other historical covenants run continuously and parallel to one another, from different points of origin. As for Moses, the NT seems to indicate that aspects of Moses find their terminus at Christ. (see diagram below)
This is a controversial subject and I am not fully confident of the position outlined below because it involves separating the three uses of the Law. As we have already seen, the problem with separating them is they are like strands of a braided rope. Nevertheless I have unraveled each strand from the rope to trace each strand into the NT.

Abraham------------------------------blessing---------------------------

Moses-------Ceremonial--------|

-------------Civil------------|

----------------------------Moral-----------------------

David---------------transition---------------------

Christ---------new-------

The ceremonial aspects of Moses are surely fulfilled in the atoning death of Christ on the cross.
The civil aspects of Moses are arguably not continued into the NT because the NT community is not theocratic but missional; it is transethnic and transnational. The Great Commission does not send the disciples out to establish a global Jewish theocracy.
The moral aspect of the Law is understood two ways then, depending on your position about how Jews were saved during the period of the OT:

If one understands the moral aspects of the Law to be justificationary language, then the moral aspect of the Law would also be terminated at Christ, because Christ is the fulfiller of every standard of righteousness in Moses.
If however, one understands the moral aspect of the Law to be sanctificationary language, then it would be valued as an important source of wisdom and guidance for NT people, because it reflects the character of God, what pleases God and how to be in God’s blessing.
Common sense seems to be required for our ability to benefit from the Law in NT times and to search it for a deeper understanding of what pleases God.
As we have already seen, Paul ties the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the sinner, through Christ’s obeying where Adam had disobeyed, thus making justification available to all people in history (Romans 5).
But the covenant with David seems to tie the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the sinner, through Christ’s obeying where Israel had disobeyed. This of course is problematic because it implies that Gentiles are benefiting from covenant benefits which were given to the Jews.
My sense is that there is no dichotomy here.

I see the imputation of Christ’s righteousness as in His obedience to the Father, especially as it was tested in the wilderness against Satan, when Jesus triumphed in every area where Adam had failed. In doing what Adam did not do for himself, Jesus made righteousness imputable to all people throughout all history.
I understand His keeping of the Law as necessary for preparing Jesus to be a worthy sacrifice on behalf of sin in His death. I see His death as the means of our sin being transferred to Him. In dying on the cross Jesus makes sinlessness imputable to all people. He accomplishes this by absorbing our sin.
This would all argue for the Law as being a vital means of grace. Because the Law establishes the sinlessness of Christ as perfect and thereby imputable to all people, Jews and Gentiles.
The relational status that all believers in all of history have with God is two faceted:

God sees us through Christ firstly as righteous. By Christ’s life He attained the righteousness that our representative Adam failed to live up to.
God sees us through Christ secondly as sinless, and this is by His death wherein He absorbed our sins upon Himself.
A two faceted understanding of our relational status is required to account for the two distinct aspects of Christ’s mission. By His life He imputes righteousness, and by His death He imputes sinlessness.
The covenant with Moses establishes especially the terms whereby Christ’s death imputes sinlessness to believers. And I see no getting around the fact that Gentiles are benefiting, soteriologically, from Moses.
If my understanding of this is correct, then all NT believers are indebted to Moses very directly.

The author of Hebrews locates the “old” or “first covenant” with the time of Moses.

Hebrews 8:6-9.[6] But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. [7] For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.

[8] For he finds fault with them when he says:

“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord,

when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel

and with the house of Judah,

[9] not like the covenant that I made with their fathers

on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt.

For they did not continue in my covenant,

and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.

There are other covenants which are older than Moses.
Moses is “old” because it is provisional of what will be fulfilled by Jesus.
The “fault” in Moses is not in its inferior quality or in it’s provisional purpose, but in the people who did not follow Moses. Again, this points to the law as santificational language. The fault in the old is in its not being availed for sanctification.

Jesus seems to teach that annulment does not apply ideally to the moral aspects of the covenant with Moses.

Matthew 5:17–20. [17] “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. [18] For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. [19] Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. [20] For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees [see Apodictic and Casuistic Law Below], you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. (ESV)

The moral aspects of the law are not provisional in the way that the ceremonial and civil laws were.
Christ actually raises the bar of the moral aspects of Moses. Interestingly, Jesus also indicates that Moses is not the Gold Standard in some of its ethical rulings.

John 13:34–35 [34] A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. [35] By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.” (ESV)

Matthew 19:3–8 [3] And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?” [4] He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, [5] and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? [6] So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” [7] They said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?” [8] He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.

APODICTIC AND CASUISTIC LAW

The Apodictic law.

The apodictic followed the thou shalt and thou shalt not formula; it generally looks forward and instructs you on what to do and what not to do.
It is functioning more like constitutional law.
Apodictic law is unconditional. It is an all purpose imperative. It is not qualified.
The attitude of the heart is especially focused and calibrated by the Apodictic.

The Casuistic law.

The casuistic follows the if/then formula. The if/then formula can also apply prospectively, but it generally looks back at what has happened and it instructs you in how to reconcile the fact situation.
This is why there are so many more casuistic laws in Moses than apodictic.
The casuistic is functioning more like case law.
The Judges of Israel would have applied the casuistic law to the fact situations paradigmatically. Over many centuries the paradigmatic application of the casuistic law would have had the effect of expanding its scope over civil affairs until the scope of the civil laws would encroach on the spiritual absolutes in the apodictic law.
The law, under the management of the Pharisees, had evolved to the point where the casuistic had become so complex that it was informing the apodictic. It had reached a point where the fact situations of daily existence had become the major premise from which to construe the principles for righteousness and justice.
We are seeing the exact same problem in the USA today! Case law is overwhelming Constitutional Law.
I do not think that Jesus was using hyperbole when He said that our “righteousness needs to exceed that of the Pharisees”. In my opinion he was teaching an important principle:

People who excite the fine print of the Casuistic laws to make them say the opposite of what is in the Apodictic laws, are twisting God’s law to their own advantage. They are using the casuistic law to erect loopholes in the keeping of the Apodictic laws. Case in point: Leviticus 27:16-24 had provisions for dedicating portions of land for the temple, to be returned in the year of Jubilee. Jesus pointed out that the Pharisees had twisted this to avoid caring for their parents from their resources. And he said unto them, “Full well do you reject the commandment of God, in order to keep your tradition. For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother; and, He that speaks evil of father or mother, let him die the death’: but you say, ‘If a man shall say to his father or his mother, That wherewith you might have been profited by me is Corban,’ that is to say, Given to God; you no longer allow him to do anything for his father or his mother; making void the word of God by your tradition, which you have delivered: and many such like things you do” (Mark 7:1-13)
whereas people who are heart calibrated to God will not twist the Casuistic standards to their own benefit or to the misfortune of others because their hearts are in the right posture of worship towards God. With a right heart we can see the principles in God’s law.

The laws are paradigmatic.

The Law of Moses is not exhaustive.
Moses doesn’t necessarily give you a chart for judging the exact restitution or punishment for every conceivable scenario that might arise from the normal vicissitudes of Israel’s day to day existence.
It is difficult for us to understand how the Law was applied by the judges, because:

citation of law is a 1st century BC development of Roman civilization.
you do not encounter ancient judgments with specific citation, chapter and verse, of what has been violated and of what punishments apply specifically.
The absence of citation of Moses in the prophets obscures to our eyes the connection between the Law and the Prophets.
The Prophets often served as covenant prosecutors. But they do not directly reference Moses in their warnings and declarations and so we may easily miss this vital aspect of the law in prophecy.
If we do not understand the connection between the Law and the Prophets, then we are more inclined to see the prophets as serving only one purpose: that of predicting the future. But the prophets spoke into their own times as well as the future; they would have known Moses and they would have seen how Moses spoke to the situations that they addressed.
Moses and the Prophets both speak of exile and restoration. But they make different terminological choices and they speak with very different forms. Moses warns of exile with the if/then casuistic law forms which are located in the stipulations and in the sanctions of the Law.

Leviticus 26:14–16

[14] “But if you will not listen to me and will not do all these commandments, [15] if you spurn my statutes, and if your soul abhors my rules, so that you will not do all my commandments, but break my covenant, [16] then I will do this to you: I will visit you with panic, with wasting disease and fever that consume the eyes and make the heart ache. And you shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it. (ESV)

Leviticus 26:27–33

[27] “But if in spite of this you will not listen to me, but walk contrary to me, [28] then I will walk contrary to you in fury, and I myself will discipline you seven-fold for your sins. [29] You shall eat the flesh of your sons, and you shall eat the flesh of your daughters. [30] And I will destroy your high places and cut down your incense altars and cast your dead bodies upon the dead bodies of your idols, and my soul will abhor you. [31] And I will lay your cities waste and will make your sanctuaries desolate, and I will not smell your pleasing aromas. [32] And I myself will devastate the land, so that your enemies who settle in it shall be appalled at it. [33] And I will scatter you among the nations, and I will unsheathe the sword after you, and your land shall be a desolation, and your cities shall be a waste. (ESV)

Moses uses the same if / then formula to establish requirements for restoration.

Leviticus 26:40–42

[40] “But if they confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers in their treachery that they committed against me, and also in walking contrary to me, [41] so that I walked contrary to them and brought them into the land of their enemies—if then their uncircumcised heart is humbled and they make amends for their iniquity, [42] then I will remember my covenant with Jacob, and I will remember my covenant with Isaac and my covenant with Abraham, and I will remember the land. (ESV)

When the prophets warn of exile they do not quote Moses chapter and verse. But as we have already noted, the citation of law in ancient times does not appear until the 1st century BC.

THE CONTRIBUTION OF MOSES TO MODERN CIVIL LAW

Jesus left His apostles with a salvific mission, not a theocratic mission. Matthew 28:18–20.
However, even civil law has some value for the New Covenant people of God in whatever community they find themselves serving.

The disciplinary responsibility of the church does not extend into civil society, but the covenant with Noah still stands in NT times and God’s people are covenantly obligated along with all people, to preserve life. Certainly this entails being civically engaged.
NT believers must not think of civil engagement as being unequally yoked. Under Noah, the NT believer is required to collaborate with unbelievers in matters of social justice. All of our powers of friendly persuasion are to be shared with the world that we live in, for the preservation of life that is mandated in the covenant of Noah.
In Genesis 3:15 we learned that the “seed of the serpent” is at enmity with “the seed of the woman”, but enmity does not mean that the seed of the woman is to withdrawal from the world and leave the seed of the serpent to destroy the innocent.
Job chapter 29 illustrates the many ways that righteous Job engaged his civic duties to protect the innocent from the predators.
It is a fair statement to say that many of the greatest acts of negligence by the church through the ages stems from an ignorance of the covenant with Noah. Noah is truly the forgotten covenant!
The NT does not seem to anticipate the day when Christians will be in charge of the government. But this does not preclude Christians from political advocacy.

“Christians have an obligation both to proclaim the heavenly and everlasting freedom of the Gospel and the earthly and temporal freedom from injustice. But they are different. When we confuse them, we take the kingdom into our own hands, transforming it from a kingdom of grace into a kingdom of glory and power.” Michael Horton.

Bruce Gore observes that the covenant with Moses will teach principles that have found their way into the modern law and jurisprudence of Western Civilization:

Jurisdiction - power should never be fully concentrated in one entity. Moses will separate the powers of the Priesthood from the powers of the monarchy of Israel.
Equality - the principle of human equality is rooted in our being “image bearers”. No other culture in the history of the world has an anthropology of man that establishes the equality of man on the principle of man being made in the image of God. The ancient religions personified their Gods in the image of man and their emperors were quasi-deities, who could legally treat their subjects in whatever way suited their own purpose.
Fault - the blame for doing something wrong is placed squarely on the person who is responsible for wrongdoing and for mistakes. The law of Moses even nuanced degrees of blame in murder and involuntary manslaughter.
Vow - the powers of government should be invokable to force people to keep their vows and contracts.
Dominion - the law of private property. Thou shalt not steal. For the believer, dominion is managerial as an act of stewardship.
Restitution - compensating for injury done.

All men remain under the covenants given to Adam and Noah; the civil laws in those covenants are to be taken up as the cause of all men, not just Christians. All the nations, through all of time, are held accountable by God to the civil components of those laws. Moses adds layers to those laws, and history has shown that these have benefited humankind.
As already noted, the NT is silent on many matters that concern the church. For instance, the NT says remarkably little about social justice. But this might be because the NT authors felt that issues of social justice were adequately covered in the OT.

MOSES AND DAVID

All the blessings that God had promised His people in Abraham were channeled through a theocracy under Moses. With David the blessings will channel through the monarchy and the through the king’s fidelity to God in Moses.
The book of Judges will conclude with the words “in those days there was no king in Israel. Everyone did what was right in his own eyes.” Judges 21:25.

Moses gave the Law as a mediator.
Joshua and the Judges were administrators of the Law. And under their administrative mediatorial service, Israel floundered. At the end of the book of Judges the reader is given words that anticipate a monarchical mediator/administrator.
The Samaritans will reject everything in the Palestinian Canon from the end of Joshua onwards, because they rightly understood those writings to be supportive of a Davidic monarchy. Even a book as innocuous as Ruth was censored because Ruth tells the story of a noblewoman who is the great grandmother of David. The book of Judges pulls no punches in chronicling the failures of every tribe, but the reader cannot miss the fact that the author of Judges is showing the tribe of Benjamin in it’s poorest light. This too, gave the appearance the historical books were written by a Davidic monarchy sympathizer whose goal is to supplant the dynasty of Saul the Benjamite.

Psalm 2 teaches that the kings had a “son of God” relational status to God. The fortune of God’s people will be transitioned from tribal fidelity to the law under the administration of the Judges, to the monarchical fidelity to the law under the kings. The obedience to the law will still matter very much at the level of the Priesthood, the Congregation and the Individual, but emphasis will be transferred to the son of God.
This is how the covenant with David prepares Israel to receive the righteousness of Christ through imputation. God’s mercy will be advanced in the covenant with David by making a way for His mercy to pass to His people, even when they do not merit His mercy and grace.
Through the covenant with David, the righteousness standards that God’s people couldn't live up to in Moses, will be imputed to them through the representation of their Messiah King, son of David, son of God!

THE LAW ACCORDING TO THE APOSTLES

The epistolary writings that speak to the issue of the law in the NT are a polemic in response to the Jews who were intent on denying the Gentiles a place in the body of Christ, and the Judiazers who were intent on making the Gentiles kosher with the Law.
Paul will make his arguments in a way that demonstrates that the New Covenant is the Covenant that the Old Covenant had pointed to all along.
Peter uses even stronger words against the Judaizing element at the Jerusalem Council:

Acts 15:10–11. [10] Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? [11] But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.” [12] And all the assembly fell silent, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles. (ESV)

Peter can state that the law was unbearable because the Judiazers and their forefathers had looked to the OT system as complete, that is not as provisional.
If you were not looking prospectively to Jesus from your place in OT history, you were indeed living under something difficult. But this is not to be construed as saying that everyone who kept up the ceremonial law in OT times, was living under an onerous system. That would all depend on their heart and their faith and to what they hoped in. Think of Simeon from Luke 2:22-32. Simeon was a devout man of God.

[22] And when the time came for their purification according to the Law of Moses, they brought him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord [23] (as it is written in the Law of the Lord, “Every male who first opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord”) [24] and to offer a sacrifice according to what is said in the Law of the Lord, “a pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons.” [25] Now there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon, and this man was righteous and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him. [26] And it had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not see death before he had seen the Lord's Christ. [27] And he came in the Spirit into the temple, and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him according to the custom of the Law, [28] he took him up in his arms and blessed God and said,

[29] “Lord, now you are letting your servant depart in peace,

according to your word;

[30] for my eyes have seen your salvation

[31] that you have prepared in the presence of all peoples,

[32] a light for revelation to the Gentiles,

and for glory to your people Israel.” (ESV)

The NT says that the Law provided a temporal means of atoning for sin. It was in place for a period until Christ.

Galatians 3:19–20. [19] Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was put in place through angels by an intermediary. [20] Now an intermediary implies more than one, but God is one. (ESV)

History reflects that the people that God chose as His people, were not particularly righteous. Rather, they were excessively unrighteous and as such they needed a full blown, broad spectrum, heavy duty, atonement system.

God promised Abraham land and seed and blessing. Now we have arrived with Moses to the place when the seed, plural (that is the children of Abraham) are about to take the land and the blessing. But the seed singular (that is Christ) will not come until later, to climatically advance the very same promises.

Galatians 3:15–18 [15] To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified. [16] Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. [17] This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void. [18] For if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise. (ESV)

Galatians 3:21-22 gives another reason for why the “new” is better than the “old”. The “old” is not giving life, but it is pointing to the “new” which will give life finally and climatically.

[21] Is the law then contrary to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could give life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law. [22] But the Scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. (ESV)

Galatians 3:23-29 calls the law a tutor or guardian.

[23] Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. [24] So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. [25] But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, [26] for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. [27] For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. [28] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. [29] And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise. (ESV)

Brad's Blog

Wednesday, August 12, 2020

GRACE THROUGH THE AGES - MOSES

No comments:

Post a Comment