The Pentateuch is often called the “Book of the Law” (Joshua 1:8) or teaching. For today’s readers, such a title can be misleading, as the current understanding of statute law differs significantly from that featured within the text[1]. Similarly, the text includes numerous genres within its broader narrative form[2]; the law is not alone. However, the genre of law is unique in its role. As such, when mentioning law, this post will not refer to the Pentateuch as a whole unit; rather, it will refer to the genre of law interspersed throughout the text (the major sections of the law are: Exodus 20-40; Leviticus; and Deuteronomy 5-30).
In his classic The Laws in the Pentateuch and Other Studies, Martin Noth wrote the following:
“From the beginning of the Christian Church the equation “Old Testament = law” was very widespread, and remains current to the present day.”
Martin Noth, The Laws in the Pentateuch and Other Studies, trans. D. R. Ap-Thomas (Edinburgh, London: Oliver and Boyd Ltd, 1966), 3.
This belief has caused tension among believers, some going so far as to suggest the Old Testament, especially its sections on law, is irrelevant because of the New Covenant’s idea of grace: “Now we are released from the law” (Romans 7:6a ESV). But that does not remove the profitability of such texts to Christians (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
As mentioned, for followers of Jesus Christ, there is truth in the following statement:
“Much of the Mosaic law was superseded by the coming of Jesus and is not addressed to the community of God’s people today in the same way it was addressed to the nation of Israel.”
Scott B. Rae, Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics, 4th ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2018), 72.
Before this assertion can be discussed, there must be an appreciation of how the original audience, the nation of Israel, understood and practiced the law.
From the outset, it must be mentioned that with the discovery of Hammurabi’s laws engraved on stele around 1900 AD[3], the interpretation and understanding of Ancient Israel’s laws changed. No longer could these laws be seen as unique to Israel; many either featured in or were similar to those of Hammurabi, whose laws dated several centuries before Moses[4]. With numerous law codes known throughout the Ancient Near East period, no consensus has ensued on exactly how these codes were understood in their historical context.
For ancient Israel, their laws represented the “essence of their religion”[5]. Fundamentally, it is important to realise that these law codes were not legislative, nor were they intended to be comprehensive[6]. While it is possible they may have been “based on actual legal judgments”[7], it is impossible to be certain. In today’s world, judicial cases and hearings follow legislation – known as normative laws. It is an exhaustive system, where if the law does not provide detail in a specific area, nothing can be actioned as legal recompense. What is clear about the Ancient law codes is that they indicated how they ought to be interpreted. It allowed room for a judge to “apply his intuition about wrongness to the cases he judged and consider each on its own merits”[8]. Following the narrative of Israel’s forebears, God, revealing Himself as YHWH (Exodus 3:14), enters a suzerain-vassal type of covenant[9]. In this covenant, God promises that He will make Abraham:
“A great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”
Genesis 12:2-3 ESV.
Abraham and his descendants did nothing to warrant such a relationship with YHWH. It was a free gift, and the law served as the “conditions” of the covenantal relationship (Exodus 20:6; Leviticus 26:3, 14-15; and Deuteronomy 5:10-16). The law formed part of YHWH’s revelation to the people for how they ought to live, both in the worship of YHWH and in care for their neighbour. Space does not allow for further discussion surrounding the covenantal relationships between YHWH and Israel, but this brief discussion ought to depict both the role and importance the law played in ancient Israel.
For the postmodern Christian, there is often a disdain for the law, especially in Word of Faith communities. In his letter to the Romans, the Apostle Paul wrote the following: “For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace” (Romans 6:14 ESV). The Message paraphrase puts it this way:
“Sin can’t tell you how to live. After all, you’re not living under that old tyranny any longer. You’re living in the freedom of God.”
Romans 6:14 MSG.
Paul is absolutely correct that Christians are not held accountable to the law. Our relationship with the Triune God shifted upon the Incarnation of Jesus. But such a paraphrase paints a picture that does not reflect the ancient Israelite understanding of the law. It was not tyranny; it was God’s revelation according to the day’s culture. Christians make a grave mistake should they adopt such an assumption about the law found in the Pentateuch. For even Jesus said the following:
“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.”
Matthew 5:17 ESV.
He elaborates further, highlighting the issue: “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. 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” (Matthew 5:18-19). There is more at stake than simply abolishing or a supersession of the law.
Under the New Covenant founded by Christ, our understanding and appreciation of the laws has and ought to have changed. But that does not mean the laws are not inapplicable to Jesus’ followers. While the laws are not binding for the Christian’s relationship with the Triune God, they remain valid as a revelation of God’s character and desire for humanity. Indeed, God has not changed His mind, for He is “the same yesterday, today, and forever” (Hebrews 13:8 HCSB). Peterson points out the following:
“The law given to Israel on tablets of stone is contrasted with the inward working of the Holy Spirit under the new covenant, writing the law on the hearts of the believers.”
See 2 Cor. 3:3-11. David G. Peterson, Romans: Evangelical Biblical Theology Commentary, (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2020), 288.
If the laws are not binding per se but still applicable for wisdom and understanding, it remains to be seen how a Christian ought to interpret the law.
There are numerous different laws in the Pentateuch. Some appear straightforward in their message and application. An apt example is the Decalogue: “You shall not commit adultery” (Exodus 20:14, Deuteronomy 5:18 ESV). However, other laws seem far more arbitrary or confusing: “You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk” (Exodus 23:19b). Others seem straightforward, yet some Christians might ignore them, such as the command not to get a tattoo (Leviticus 19:28). In his essay The Origins of Israelite Law, Albrecht Alt proposed that all of the laws could be summarised by two distinct definitions: casuistic and apodictic.
Casuistic laws are often judicial, case-based or hypothetical. They are attached to specific circumstances[10], typically written in the third person[11] and “introduced by an objective conditional clause beginning ‘If…’”[12]. An example is “If men have a quarrel and one strikes the other with a stone or with his fist, and he does not die but remains in bed, if he gets up and walks around outside on his staff, then he who struck him shall go unpunished; he shall only pay for his loss of time, and shall take care of him until he is completely healed” (Exodus 21:18-19 NASB). Due to the specific nature of these laws, their interpretation and application for today are far different to the apodictic laws.
Apodictic laws differ significantly. They can still be used in judging cases between two parties, but they are not typically arranged in conventional sentence structure[13]. These laws are “rare outside of Israel”[14] and “generally employ a second-person imperative form: “You shall/shall not””[15]. Seen as “absolute, declarative laws”[16], these are often easier for the reader to understand and apply to their context because they provide “no reason for its commands… allowing no exception or argument”[17]. The example of “you shall not commit adultery” (Exodus 20:14, Deuteronomy 5:18 ESV) previously provided is one such law. For Christians, laws such as these are easy to understand, providing witness to God’s desire for human marriages and sexuality. A law such as this remains appropriate for Christians to adhere to. Alt further typified the apodictic laws into four separate groups, which have been heavily debated since. It is not the purpose of this post to delve into such a discussion. A brief understanding of apodictic laws, in general, will suffice.
Throughout the Pentateuch, especially Leviticus, numerous cultic laws focus upon Jewish practices at the Temple and other associated rituals. These laws have a “particular interest to the priesthood rather than to the laity”[18]. A key example is the practices surrounding the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16) among other sacrifices. Through His death and resurrection, Jesus fulfilled the Day of Atonement practices. Jesus was:
“Put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.”
Romans 3:25a ESV.
As such, adherence and obedience to these laws by followers of Christ would be a drastic waste of resources and time. Further, it reflects a belief in the inadequacy of Christ’s example and sacrifice, which is problematic to the Christian faith. Therefore, Priestly laws best serve the follower of Christ to illuminate soteriology, what Jesus achieved.
Numerous other aspects of the law can be discussed, but due to space, a brief discussion on the Holiness Code will conclude this section. Found in Leviticus 17-27[19], the code specifies “laws on maintaining purity mainly through social action, Israel is able to live a life that is ‘Holy to YHWH’”[20]. As the name indicates, this law section emphasizes the holiness of YHWH and functions as a framework for the Israelites to seek to maintain their holiness and reflect it to the nations surrounding them. This section of the text frequently includes the following: “You shall be holy because I am holy” and, similarly, “I am Yahweh”[21]. Returning to Genesis 12, the Israelites were to be a blessing to the nations (Genesis 12:3) and the Holiness Code served as part of that. To assist with interpreting such laws for Christians, the account in Acts 10 must be considered. The Holiness Code includes a rather strict assessment of food consumption; many animals are considered unclean and unsuitable for Israelite consumption. However, in Peter’s vision, he sees a cloth descend from heaven covered with “all kinds of unclean animals, reptiles and birds”[22]. Despite Peter’s negative reaction, a voice called out advising him to eat: “What God has made clean, you must not call common” (Acts 10:15 HCSB). The point becomes clear: God has made the food clean. But it goes further than diet alone[23]; it reflects the saving work of Jesus, opening the door to the nations, as opposed to the Hebrew people alone. Due to this vision, “the church has rejected the strict food laws“[24] found in the Holiness Code. Christians no longer adhere wholly to the code, which begs the question:
Has God changed His mind?
As briefly discussed earlier, God has not changed His position. As understood within its ancient context, the law functioned as a commentary or revelation about God to His chosen people. He was to be their King. To use New Testament language, He was to be their head (1 Corinthians 11:4). Should Christians seek to adhere to the full body of laws they may fail, depending upon the posture of their heart. In his book The Great Omission, Dallas Willard sums up the point well:
“Grace is not opposed to effort, it is opposed to earning. Earning is an attitude. Effort is an action. Grace, you know, does not just have to do with forgiveness of sins alone.”
Dallas Willard, The Great Omission: Reclaiming Jesus’ Essential Teachings on Discipleship, (Oxford, England: Monarch Books, 2014), 61.
That was the dilemma Jesus faced when He regularly confronted the Pharisees in His day. Rather than being an outworking of the communal people’s love for God, the law became a burden, a hard set of rules for individuals to adhere to. For postmodern Christians, following the law is viable, but it should not replace Jesus in our lives. The law ought to be used as an outworking of our love for God, to seek to honour Him. But it also serves as a reminder for Christians how deeply we fall short of His standards and desire.
“For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”
Romans 3:23 ESV.
The law functions as a reminder of God’s perfection and desire for humanity and Christians ought not to discredit the law due to the concept of grace. The two can and do work hand in hand. The posture of the heart is of the utmost importance.
Are we as Christians following the law in an attempt to earn salvation or righteousness? Or is it an effort to honour the God we espouse to love and follow?
[1] Roger Norman Whybray, Introduction to the Pentateuch, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995), 107.
[2] John H. Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992), 7 of 14, Perlego.
[3] John H. Walton, and Andrew E. Hill, Old Testament Today: A Journey from Ancient Context to Contemporary Relevance, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2013), 53.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Gale A. Yee, Hugh R. Page Jr., and Matthew J. M. Coomber, eds., The Pentateuch: Fortress Commentary on the Bible, (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2016), 12 of 15, Perlego.
[6] John H. Walton, and J. Harvey Walton, The Lost World of the Torah: Law as Covenant and Wisdom in Ancient Context, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2019), 8 of 43, Perlego.
[7] Whybray, Pentateuch, 108.
[8] Walton, Lost World, 8 of 43, Perlego.
[9] Walter Houston, Pentateuch, (London, England: SCM Press, 2013), 84.
[10] Victor P. Hamilton, Handbook on the Pentateuch: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005), 18 of 37, Perlego.
[11] Bradford A. Anderson, and Paula Gooder, An Introduction to the Study of the Pentateuch, (London, UK: Bloomsbury, 2017), 23 of 29, Perlego.
[12] Albrecht Alt, Essays on Old Testament History and Religion, trans. R. A. Wilson (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company Inc, 1967), 113.
[13] Ibid, 135.
[14] R. Alan Cole, Exodus: Tyndale Old Testament Commentary, 2nd ed. (Nottingham, UK: InterVarsity Press, 2008), 12 of 14, Perlego.
[15] T. Desmond Alexander, and David Baker, eds., Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch, A Compendium of Contemporary Biblical Scholarship, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 12 of 47, Perlego.
[16] Thomas B. Dozeman, The Pentateuch: Introducing the Torah, (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2017), 25 of 26, Perlego.
[17] Cole, Exodus, 12 of 14, Perlego.
[18] Whybray, Pentateuch, 124.
[19] Whybray and others conclude the Holiness Code at chapter 26, but there are still elements within chapter 27 that warrant its inclusion. John M. Powell, The World, Genesis, and Theology of the Pentateuch, (Murrells Inlet, SC: Covenant Books, 2022), 15 of 17, Perlego.
[20] Richard S. Briggs, and Joel N. Lohr, eds., A Theological Introduction to the Pentateuch: Interpreting the Torah as Christian Scripture, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012), 11 of 19, Perlego.
[21] Whybray, Pentateuch, 130.
[22] Darrell L. Bock, Acts: Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007), 53 of 112, Perlego.
[23] Bock, Acts, 53 of 112, Perlego.
[24] Charles L. Aaron Jr., The Bible’s Foundation: An Introduction to the Pentateuch, (Danvers, MA: Chalice Press, 2013), 10 of 14, Perlego.
Leave a Reply