“The law made nothing perfect” (Hebrews 7:19), but pointed all to the need to be made righteous by faith in the merits of the substitution offering (which was a type of Christ to come.) The law was not the means of righteousness, but by the law was the knowledge of sin, Romans 7:7.
The detail of the law got into every person’s life. The letter of the law exposed impurities and sin in everyone. It required them to offer a sacrifice in order to be justified before God.
The whole system of the Old Testament taught the fact that all have sin, none are without sin, and the only way to be made acceptable to God was through the merits of the substitution offering, which was a type of Christ.
The detail of the law demonstrated man’s sinful state before God. The sacrificial offering demonstrated that acceptance with God was only possible through Christ’s offering of Himself for man.
The detail of the law set forth the principles of what sin is. The sacrifical lamb set forth the principles of what Christ’s offering is. BOTH of these ceremonial types set forth that which is principally true, regarding both sin and the Saviour.
When Christ died on the cross, all the ceremonial types were done away with, NOT by declaring them to be incorrect, but by fulfilling that which they represented, Matthew 5:17-19.
So, we preach Christ, as the apostles did, who only had the Old Testament scritpures that declared the truth concerning the gospel of Jesus Christ, by both typology and prophecy, Acts 28:23. The gospel of Jesus Christ is “…the gospel according to the scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:1-4), which is directly referring to what the Old Testament scriptures set forth in typology and prophecy concerning Christ’s work of redemption, that was foreordained before the foundation of the world.
Since we declare that the principles set forth in the Old Testament ceremonial law all convey important truth regarding Christ’s sacrificial offering, we must also then declare that the principles that the Old Testament laws set forth regarding sin, right and wrong, also convey important knowledge as to what is to be considered right and wrong today. We must not apply a double standard by saying the ceremonial laws correctly identify the truth concerning Christ, but are incorrect standards by which to determine right and wrong concerning other matters.
To be consistent in our theology, if we say that since Christ died on the cross, and we are no longer under the law, that it means we are now free to violate the principles set forth by the law, then we must also say it would be proper to deny and violate the principles of truth that the Old Testament system set forth concerning Christ’s sacrificial death. So if we should disregard the principles set forth through the teachings and examples of the Old Testament laws, then we should also disregard the gospel according to the scriptures, as both are from the same system.
The Bible (2 Timothy 3:16-17) declares that “all scripture” is to be regarded as being profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. Just as we study the Old Testament types for a greater understanding of Christ and His sacrificial offering for our righteousness, we are to study the Old Testament laws for a greater understanding of God’s principles concerning what is right and wrong for doctrine and what is to be regarded as sin: “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.” 1 John 3:4 God did not say that the transgression of the law is no longer sin!
It is not doctrinal soundness to profess to accept what the Old Testament teaches concerning Christ, while at the same time denying what the Old Testament sets forth as being correct principles for New Testament doctrine. The detail of the Old Testament law is no longer to be observed, just as the animal sacrifice is no longer to be offered. But the principles that are set forth in the Old Testament law and typologies are still correct and are not to be violated or contradicted.
It is more presumptuous than it is faith, to want to claim the benefits of what is declared in the Old Testament regarding the salvation that Christ’s offering affords, while at the same time wanting to reject, deny and live contrary to the principles that God’s laws set forth in the Old Testament. Balaam wanted to die the death of the righteous, but he lacked the faith to live unto God’s principles.
How can one’s belief be correct concerning the Christ that the “schoolmaster” (the law) sets forth, if at the same time they are rejecting what the “schoolmaster” (the law) sets forth, as being correct regarding what is right and what is wrong? See Galatians 3:24
It appears that one must agree with the scripture conclusion of what sin is, in order to see the provision for that sin, which is Christ, Galatians 3:22.
To deny that the principles set forth in Old Testament laws are the right principles, is to thus deny the righteousness of Christ in having died for the transgression of those principles. If the principles set forth in the laws of the Old Testament are incorrect, then there would have been no sin committed for the transgression of those incorrect principles. If it is okay to live in violation of the principles God set forth in His laws, God sure messed up, the people were placed under unjust oppression under these laws, and Christ died in vain for the transgression of those laws. WHAT CONFUSION!
SHARING
