Sanctified by the Law of Moses

Dr. Couch, would we say that the Jews in the Old Testament were sanctified by the Law of Moses, if they kept it? ANSWER:  I don't think so. Looking up all the words for "sanctification" in the OT, we do not find that idea mentioned. The Lord says the seventh day of the week is to be sanctified, He is sanctified in Israel, the sons of Israel would be sanctified, but the work of the Law in sanctifying Israel is not mentioned.    In Hebrew, the word "sanctify" and its related words, is Ko'desh. It means "to be holy," "to set something aside," thus making it unique or special.    In the NT there is Positional Sanctification that takes place when one accepts Christ as Savior. And then there is Progressive Sanctification, in both the OT and the NT, that is, we are to become more and more sanctified as we grow or mature. This was to be true for both the Jews in the OT and for the Christians in the NT.    The OT Jews were told "Be sanctified" or "Be holy; for I am holy" (Lev. 11:44), and for Christians in the NT (and quoting Leviticus 11:44), we read "Be holy, for I am holy" (1 Pet. 1:15-16).    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch  (1/11)

How are the Jews Saved?

Dr. Couch, I heard of a view that says the Jews were saved by being obedient to the Law, and that they were saved when they were brought out of Egypt; they acted in a way worthy of their high calling of Law-keeping! How are the Jews saved? ANSWER: They are saved by personal faith just as Gentiles. There is a national redemption in that the nation was to keep the Law as a whole but in the final analysis, they each must believe in what God said to them, trusting Him, in order to be justified. "Abraham believed God and (his belief) was counted to him as righteousness" (Gen. 15:6). All Jews afterwards were saved in the same way. We could probably go to hundreds of verses that would show Jews are saved by faith but here are a few. For example Acts 15 and the Jerusalem Council Peter said: "God made no distinction between us (Jews) and them (the Gentiles), cleansing their hearts by faith. … But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, IN THE SAME WAY AS THEY ALSO ARE" (vv. 9, 11). See also Romans 10:1-14 which is written to the Jews. "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. … But the righteousness based on faith speaks thus, ..." (vv. 4, 6). "The Scripture says, 'Whoever believes in Him will not be disappointed" (v. 11). "Salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Gentile" (Rom. 1:16). "He saved us not on the basis of works which we have done (by means) of righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of the 'again birthing' and the 'remaking' done by the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5). This is applicable not only for Gentiles but for Jews also! Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch (1/11)

Talmud and Midrash

Dr. Couch, what is the Talmud and the Midrash? ANSWER: The body of Hebrew laws, civil and canonical, is based on the Torah, the Law of Moses, or the Pentateuch, the first five books of our Bible—Genesis through Deuteronomy. The Talmud is like a commentary based on the learned opinions and decisions of Jewish teachers from around 300 BC until 500 AD. The word "Talmud" means "teaching" or "doctrine." The Talmud is divided into two parts: (1) the Mishnah meaning "the repetition or explanation." This is a collection or digest of "oral laws" traditions and explanations of OT Scripture. (2) the Gemara, meaning "the supplement", a further commentary on the preceding part, the Mishnah. The Midrash is also a formal doctrinal and "preaching" exposition of the Hebrew Scriptures written in Hebrew or Aramaic (which is a language related to Hebrew). The Midrash is a commentary not simply a translation. The Midrash is a further expansion of the Law of Moses. I believe commentaries on the Old and New Testaments are helpful in giving us an understanding of the Bible. But they do not become the Bible itself! Commentaries are simply "helps" that we do not take as authoritative. But the Jews begin to see these writings as having absolute authority as if they were the Word of God itself! The Midrash flourished from about 100 BC to 300 AD. This was at first an oral writing but was then turned into permanent written form. These were the earliest synagogue readings or "sermons" that were quoted and read to the common people in their assemblies. Unfortunately, the people moved farther and farther away from reading the OT Scriptures themselves to simply reading these commentaries and avoiding the OT manuscripts specifically. In other words, the commentaries became authoritative and the writings of the prophets who wrote under the guidance of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit began to be ignored. This specifically has happened also in Catholicism. What the Church Fathers say has more weight than the prophets or the apostles! Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch (11/10)

Mosaic Covenant

Dr. Couch, what is the difference between the Mosaic covenant and the dispensation of Law? ANSWER:  I only hold to biblical covenants, that is, those that are called "covenants" in the Bible. (Noahic, Abrahamic, Davidic, Land, New) Thus, there is no such thing as the "covenants" "of grace (or redemption)," or "of works." Even the big covenant guys like Berhkof and Hodge admit that these are not explicit but, in their view (though they are wrong) they say they are implied, and they were made in eternity past, even before the time of Adam. In other words, the covenants of grace and works are made up by the covenant guys. But dispensationalists can easily see the dispensational changes that are obvious as the Bible moves along. A dispensation is an economy, or a period in the way God is working that is distinct from another period.    Some dispensationalists make a big deal about the fact that a dispensation is not about a specific period of time. While it is true that the word does not reflect the idea of a time-period, still a dispensation differentiates one time period from another. Thus, time is involved!     The Mosaic covenant is called "a covenant," so therefore, it is! We can observe the changes in time and in history, in the way God is dealing with people in Scripture. Thus, we can observe the changes that took place when God gave Moses the law covenant. This was now a different period than the way He dealt with the Fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And the law dispensation will be done away with, and we will move to the dispensation of the New covenant, or the church dispensation.    We OBSERVE and can SEE the dispensations, the obvious changes from one period to the next. This is not hard to do, unless one is brainwashed by the mindless arguments of the covenant guys.     This is really simple and easy to follow—it is not complicated or hard to understand. It is just that Covenant guys are locked in to what they perceive in their minds and they totally miss what the Bible is saying.    Charles Hodge believed in the dispensations. See my book Classical Evangelical Hermeneutics. However, he did not believe in the dispensation of the coming kingdom.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (9/10)

Mixing the Mosaic Covenant with the New Covenant

Dr. Couch, is there a mixing between the Mosaic covenant (the Law) with the New covenant? It seems that is the case in Deuteronomy 30, especially verse 6, where it is mentioned that someday God would "circumcise their hearts and the hearts of your descendants to love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul in order that you may live." ANSWER:  Verse 6 is a preview of the coming of the New covenant, but this is not a mixing of the two covenants. Moses gives to Israel an order of what God is doing with the nation. (1) When God is finished bringing the blessing and the cursing on Israel (v. 1), (2) Then Israel will return to the Lord and obey Him with all their hearts. (3) Then they will return to the land (v. 5), and (4) God will circumcise their heart to love Him (v. 6). (5) God will afflict their enemies (v. 7), and (6) They shall prosper (v. 9). This will happen (7) WHEN they obey the Lord their God, keep His statutes, and turn to Him with all their heart and soul (v. 10).    Actually, there is a contrast between the Mosaic covenant and the New covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-37). The New covenant "is not like the covenant (the Mosaic covenant) which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke ..." (v. 32).    The New covenant replaced the "old" covenant, the Mosaic covenant, as mentioned by the writer of Hebrews who said: "When God speaks of the New covenant, He has made the first (the Mosaic) obsolete (palaioo, paleontology, to make old) and growing old [and it is] ready to disappear" (Heb. 8:13).     The apostle Paul makes it clear we are no longer under the law. "The law was our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor (under the law)" (Gal. 3:24-25). And, "by the works of the law no flesh will be justified in [God's] sight ..." (Rom. 3:20).    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (7-10)

The Law of God

Dr. Couch, what is the "law of God" in which Joshua wrote his final words, as mentioned in Joshua 24:26? ANSWER:  There are different opinions on what this is. Some believe Joshua wrote (1) additional words to the Pentateuch, the Law of Moses. Others hold that (2) it was a different scroll of information that Joshua wrote that was simply added alongside of the Law, a separate document all together.    The word book in Hebrew is the word "Sa'pher meaning the scroll. This was a particular scroll called "the law of God." Unger takes the first view but I take the second view because this is how the Rabbis interpret the statement, and I believe they are correct.    Joshua is very serious about what he wrote. He apparently took it as inspired of the Lord, though it only served for a period of time and then was discarded. Joshua takes several verses to describe what he did in the writing of this scroll.    Joshua made a binding covenant with the people. What he wrote he turned into an agreement, a statute and an ordinance that day in Shechem (v. 25). By this he established his authority over the people as their new leader in place of Moses. Some believe that Joshua simply renewed the covenant which God had first made with Israel at Sinai, but I am not sure that what he wrote is simply a repeat of the Sinaitic agreement. What Joshua did here seems to be something that is additional, going forward with the people in a new step as they fortify the land they were entering.    On this "law of God" the Rabbis say:    "This cannot mean that Joshua added this as an appendix to the Pentateuch and included it therein; firstly because the Books of Moses were too sacred to be tampered with, and secondly, because the words are not to be found there. It may indicate that he wrote them on a scroll which he deposited in the same place together with 'the book of the Law of God.' This makes sense if we read it correctly as 'in a book of the law of God.' Thus, 'it became a book of the law of God.' These words of Joshua then were simply placed alongside of the Torah of Moses as something additional but not formally attached or tied to the Pentateuch."    Joshua then took "a great stone" and set it under the oak that was by the sanctuary of the Lord (v. 26b). It was a common practice to set up a stone to commemorate an event of importance (cf. Gen. 28:18; Exod. 24:4). Joshua commemorated the crossing of the Jordan in this manner (4:3). Joshua here is declaring that this place was "a sanctuary of (for) the Lord." This became a place where the Lord would commune with Joshua and the people. Remember, a geographical place had not been established yet for the people to formally worship. The stone was set up "under an oak (tree)" that too became a sacred location. Joshua spoke to the people in order to confirm their inheritance.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Apr., 10)

Meaning of Luke 16:14-17

Dr. Couch, what is going on in Luke 16:14-17? I know you wrote a nationally published commentary on Luke, so you have some idea of what the Lord is talking about. ANSWER:  Christ is speaking to the Pharisees because He knew they were lovers of money. Before men, they were trying to justify themselves and yet God the Father knew their hearts. Before John the Baptist began proclaiming the gospel (good news) of the coming Messianic Kingdom (the kingdom of God), the Pharisees bragged in their Law-keeping. But then some of them saw the benefit of following after the kingdom, whereby the rigors of the Law were eased. While the preaching and the offer of the Kingdom was the new message, the Lord reminded them that the Law was still around, for "It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail" (v. 17).    The millennial Kingdom at that point would be rejected and the belief in the simple gospel would be proclaimed after the crucifixion of Christ, and yet it too would be spurned. But the Jews, especially the Pharisees, could not escape the Law! This does not mean that they were to be saved by "Law-keeping." I wrote in my commentary:     But God knew their hearts (v. 15a). What men esteem, God detests (v. 15b). He then added that since the coming of John the Baptist, everyone was trying to force his way into the kingdom of God (v. 16), "but it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail" (v. 17). Many of the Jews wanted the benefits of the kingdom proclaimed by John and the Lord Jesus, but the rigors of the Law and its conviction about the nature of sin were being ignored. God was examining hearts, and the judgment of the Law was standing.    Everything Jesus was teaching was being scoffed at (v. 14). People want the easy route and do not want to live by the truth. The legalists of Christ day would pretend to keep the Law but in the long run they would reject both the Kingdom offer and the simple way of faith in the gospel.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Apr., 10)

Tithing

Dr. Couch, is tithing for the NT believers today? ANSWER:  Tithing was commanded for the Jewish people. The tithe was to be taken to the "storehouse" which was located in the Temple grounds. There was a series of "tithes" so that actually, the Jews gave more than a simple ten percent of their income. The tithe was given for food for the house of the Lord. Much of the tithe was used to feed the priests. To not give the tithe was "robbing the whole nation" of Israel (Mal. 3:9).    If the tithe was given from the right heart attitude the giver was blessed. It was a distinct element in Israel's faith and a continual reminder that the Israelites were the Lord's people and that they belonged to Him as their Creator and Redeemer. This is of course true of us today but the body of Christ is distinct from the nation of Israel. And, the Lord looks at us in a more personal way than how He responded to Israel.    The tithe was part of the Mosaic Law and binding, this is not the case of the NT saints. The NT saints are not under the Law of Moses, nor is the local church the counterpart of "the storehouse." Unger points out that in this church age, giving is not done by Law but through grace, under the direction of the Holy Spirit. The believer today is to give "as the Lord has prospered," and that could be more than a 10%, or under dire cases, it may be less than a 10%.    A tithe, or 10%, may be a good guideline for giving today, such giving is not under the guidance of the principle of the tithe. For example, I could brag if I gave only a tithe, and I could feel that I had done my duty and did not need to do more. I could argue about how spiritual I was because I had given a tithe! To get all of this straight you need to study 2 Corinthians 8:16-9:15. This gives for us today the principle for NT giving.    Since most believers today do not understand the dispensational nature of the Word of God, they remain confused about this issue. They mix OT and NT together and come up with misleading directives concerning tithing.     Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Feb., 10)

The Final Judgment

Dr. Couch, I have heard some say that the seven year tribulation is the final period of judgment of the Jews and a final judgment that ends the dispensation of the Law. Is this so? ANSWER:  There is some validity for this argument because there is no question that the last "week" of the Seventy Weeks of Daniel is a judgment against the Jewish people. The antichrist will "make a firm covenant with the many (the Jews) for one week (one seven year period), but in the middle of the week (three and a half years) he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering …" (Dan. 9:27). It is clear that this is yet future. The book of Revelation continually makes reference to the seven year tribulation by dividing it into "three and a half … and three and a half years, etc." This is referred to about five times throughout the book of Revelation. Also, the antichrist, as Paul reminds us, enters the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem and "exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God" (2 Thess. 2:4).    One could argue that Christ presented Himself as Israel's King. They rejected Him, and with that rejection, the dispensation of the church began. It must be remembered that the dispensation of the church was not prophesied or spoken of in the OT. It was a mystery, which means "something not before revealed." Paul makes that clear in Ephesians 3. He wrote of:    "My insight into the mystery of Christ which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit" (Eph. 3:4b-5). That is "that the Gentiles are (to be) fellow heirs and fellow members of the body …" (v. 6). And "to bring to light what is the dispensation of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God … according to the eternal purpose which He carried out in Christ Jesus our Lord" (vv. 9-10). Even the angels in glory did not know about the church age. Paul goes on and writes: "In order that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the church to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenlies" (v. 10).    Thus, in the mind of the Lord, the seven year tribulation is the close of God's judgment dealing with Israel before the establishment of the Christ's one thousand year Kingdom reign! The church is but a parenthesis, and it is taken home in the rapture before the terrible tribulation period begins on earth!    Some argue that the idea of the mystery of the church does not mean that the church is not mentioned in the OT, but this is not so. The most comprehensive and complete Greek commentary on Ephesians is written by Dr. Harold Hoehner. (It took him twenty years to write the 900 pages) He has an excellent treatment on "mystery" and writes:      Paul clarifies exactly when and to whom this mystery first became known. … In other generations it was not made known to people. … The mystery was made know to him by revelation, and he continues by saying that it was not made known in other generation. … The revelation is made known to all people, even the heavenly powers (vv. 2-4, 9-10). … It was not known by any person in past generations. … Paul discloses that this mystery, which was not known in past generations has now been revealed. … This corresponds with Rom. 16:25-26 where Paul states that the mystery was kept secret for ages but now has been manifest. … The revelation is some hidden thing or a mystery of God that is unveiled in God and cannot be discovered by human investigation. In the present context, it is the uncovering of a mystery that has been hidden in God throughout the ages (vv. 5, 9). (pp. 437-441)    Conclusion: It is possible then that the seven year tribulation period, which is a judgment upon the Jews (and also a judgment upon the Gentile nations), is indeed the final work with the Jews before the Kingdom is established on earth. Remember, the church is gone in the rapture before the beginning of the tribulation (1 Thess. 4)!    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch

Is the Law still in Force?

Dr. Couch, I believe the Bible is clear that the Mosaic Law ended with Christ's death, but Matthew 5:17-18 troubles me. Is the Law still in force? ANSWER:  In these verses Christ said that He did not come to "abolish" the Law but instead, to fulfill it. He said not one part of it would pass away "until all is accomplished." "Abolish" is the Greek word "to destroy, to pull or tear down." It is an Aorist Infinitive and could be translated "to reach a point to tear [the Law] down." The word "fulfill" is "plaraoo" and it is also an Aorist Infinitive. "I came to complete the Law." He then adds that not one small part of the Law will pass away until "all of it should come about" (an Aorist Subjunctive).    Many believe that the Lord was indicating that He, by His life, would fulfill or keep the Law. What part of the Law? Probably not the Civil or Ceremonial part of it but the moral principles of the Law. Christ lived a perfect and complete life, with no sin, because He is the holy Son of God!    The NT says two things: (1) the Law would someday cease and be replaced by the New Covenant, and, (2) we would no longer be under the Law. That (1) the New Covenant would replace the Mosaic Law was stated in Jeremiah 31:31-32. "I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel (Northern Kingdom) and with the house of Judah (Southern Kingdom), not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, …" With the new covenant the Jews will receive permanent forgiveness of sin (not so under the Mosaic covenant), and "their sins I will remember no more" (v. 34). Hebrews 8:6-13 picks up on this and says that the new covenant will replace the Law. "When God said 'A new covenant,' He had made the first covenant (the Law) obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear" (v. 13).    Paul then adds that (2) we are no longer under the Law which was a tutor to us to bring us to Christ. "We are no longer under a tutor" (Gal. 3:25). He also says: "You are no longer under law, but under grace" (Rom. 6:14). "We have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit (the new covenant) and not in oldness of the letter (of the Law)" (7:6).    We are now justified not by law-keeping but by faith. "We maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law" (3:28), thus we do not nullify the Law through our faith but instead "we establish the Law" (v. 31). Finally, "by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in God's sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin" (3:20). In place of law, we are "being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus" (v. 24).    I hope this helps. Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch

Are we under the Law by Works?

Dr. Couch, do Romans 3:31 and Hebrews 10:16 support the Covenant theology idea that believers are under the Law as a rule of life and for sanctification? It seems to me that the NT teaches that believers are not under the Law but under grace. 

 

    ANSWER:  If we were under Law by works, we would fail, as the Jews failed trying to keep it. Peter reminded the Jews at the Jerusalem Council that they could not keep the Law which was like putting a test upon God “by placing a yoke (upon our necks) which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear” (Acts 15:10). The point in Romans 3:31 is that God sees my faith, in a sense, fulfilling the Law: “We establish the Law” by our faith. The Greek word “establish” means “to confirm.” Thus by faith God sees me as a Law keeper, though really it was Christ who lived the perfect life and kept it! 

   Romans 3:31 says nothing about placing the church believers back under the Mosaic Law system. 

   In Hebrews 10:16-17, the author is establishing the fact that the New Covenant is now in operation. Jeremiah 31:31-on shows that the New Covenant replaces the Mosaic system. By this New Covenant God sees the believer as having the Law principles established inside, in the heart and in the mind. It no longer is something to keep by external standards. If you go back and look at the prophecy of the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31:31-on, you see that the Mosaic Law has been replaced. We are of course to live out in our lives the moral and spiritual principles that can be seen in the Law, but this is not saying we are now under the Mosaic Law as a way of life or as a system. We are not! 

   The Covenant guys just put all of the Bible into one big mixing bowl and stir it all up. Dispensational guys look carefully at context and see the unfolding plan. 

   Thanks for asking,

   Dr. Mal Couch