JesusSaidFollowMe Blog

If you’ve wondered what’s in the book “ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled”, wonder no more. Now, with the help of Google Book Search, you can search up to 20% of the book’s pages.

Two good places to start are the Subject Index (p. 153) and Author Index (p. 155, which includes several interesting quotes). Start searching here: New Covenant Theology

Most Christians believe that the Sabbath command is cancelled. And, some believe that all Old Covenant laws are cancelled, including the whole Decalogue. So, why do I believe that all Old Testament laws are cancelled?

In my book “ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled” I devoted 3 chapters to explaining why the laws from Genesis - Sinai are cancelled. Here are the 3 chapter titles…

13. Since Genesis Is Part of the Law, the Commands From Genesis – Sinai Are Cancelled (Genesis is part of the law as revelation, not as covenant which started later at Sinai.)

16. The Church Is Built on the Foundation of New Testament Apostles and Prophets’ Teaching (Eph. 2:19-20ff., cf. 3:5, 4:11)

17. Archaeology Testifies That the Bible Contains 2 Separate Canons (Rules) (The Old Covenant’s structure has several parallels to ancient, near-Eastern treaties, which included historical introductions. Genesis appears to be the historical introduction to the Old Covenant law of Moses.)

Here is Chapter 13 in its entirety…

“Did you know that Genesis is part of the law as revelation (Old Testament?) Here are 4 reasons showing why Genesis is part of the law…

1. Genesis 21 is called “the law” in Galatians 4:21-22.

“Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not listen to the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons: one by a slave woman and one by a free woman” (Gal. 4:21-22 referring to Gen. 21; cf. Rom. 3:31ff.)

2. The phrase “law and prophets” means “Genesis – Malachi” (the whole Old Testament).

3. Moses wrote the book of Genesis.

4. Archaeology testifies that Genesis is the historical introduction to the Old Covenant canon. God patterned the Old Covenant’s literary structure with some similarities to ancient, near-Eastern treaties, which included an historical introduction before the actual covenant document.

Ancient covenants were put into effect with a surrounding body of literature, a.k.a. canon. Covenant produces canon. Our Bible is made of 2 major covenants, the Old and New covenants, each surrounded by its own canon, the Old and New Testaments.

(To understand this more, see The Structure of Biblical Authority in #17 below…)

So, when the New Testament says the law is cancelled, that includes Genesis, not just post-Sinai commands.” (Excerpted from the book: “ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled”, 24 Reasons Why All Old Testament Laws Are Cancelled, And All New Testament Laws Are for Our Obedience, by Greg Gibson, p. 86)

Did the Holy Spirit replace the law of Moses? Some Christians have concluded that based on Gal. 5:18 and Rom. 7:6. Yet, perhaps a better term to describe the relationship between the law of Moses and the Spirit is “contrast” instead of “replace.”

So, does the Spirit replace/contrast the law of Moses? Yes, but we need to be careful not to read the word “only” into Gal. 5:18 and Rom. 7:6, since the law of Moses is contrasted with at least 3 other truths…

4 Contrasts to the Law of Moses

1. The law of Moses vs. the Spirit

“But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law” (Gal. 5:18).

“But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit” (Rom. 7:6).

2. The law of Moses vs. faith

“Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed…But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian…” (Gal. 3:23-25; cf. justification 3:11-12, 24-25, and righteousness 3:21).

3. The law of Moses vs. adoption

“But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who are under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons” (Gal. 4:4-5).

4. The law of Moses vs. the law of Christ

“To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law” (1 Cor. 9:20-21).

(This is not to imply that there was no Spirit or faith during the law of Moses. However, few Israelites possessed saving faith or the indwelling Spirit. But, all New Covenant saints have faith in Christ and the indwelling Spirit.)

It’s important to understand that all 4 of the above contrasts refer to the Old Covenant law of Moses, not to all law, including the New Covenant law of Christ. The whole context of Galatians is about the law of Moses in redemptive history. And, one of those contrasts above (1 Cor. 9:20-21) actually distinguishes and affirms the law of Christ. Plus, Galatians includes several commands, and also affirms the law of Christ…

“Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.” (Gal. 6:2)

Jesus Christ the New Lawgiver has a law/commands inspired and written by the Spirit in the New Testament, for His people who have faith in Christ, who are adopted by the Father, and led by the Spirit. Here’s how I explained it in my book “ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled”…

“Moses’ Law Prepared Unjustified, Spirit-Less Slaves
For Christ’s 1st Coming

One reason why God gave the law of Moses to Israel was to tutor/prepare them for Messiah’s 1st coming, so they might be justified by faith, adopted, and Spirit indwelled. But now, we don’t need the Mosaic law to tutor/prepare us because Messiah has already come, we are justified by faith (Gal. 3:23-25), adopted (Gal. 3:26 - 4:7), and Spirit-indwelled (Gal. 5:18).

Christ’s Law Helps Prepare Justified, Spirit-Indwelled Heirs
For His 2nd Coming

Moses’ law prepared unjustified, Spirit-less slaves for Christ’s 1st coming. But, Christ’s law helps prepare justified, Spirit-indwelled heirs for His 2nd coming.” (“ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled”, 24 Reasons Why All Old Testament Laws Are Cancelled, And All New Testament Laws Are for Our Obedience, by Greg Gibson, pp. 118.)

23. The Bible Never Criticizes the Law of Christ, But Praises It

Some Covenant Theologians think that the law of Christ = the law of Moses. However, does the law of Christ include, “…nor shall you wear a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material?” (Lev. 19:19). And, does the Law of Moses include, “Make disciples of all nations, baptizing them…?” (Mt. 28:19). No, the law of Moses and the law of Christ obviously refer to 2 different time periods in redemptive history.

The Bible criticizes the law of Moses, but never the law of Christ. In fact, the Bible praises the law of Christ…

Christ Is a New Lawgiver, Not Just a Law Keeper:
See the “12 New Commands From Christ’s New Law” below.

Messiah’s Law Is for the Gentiles:
“…He will bring forth justice to the nations…the coastlands shall wait for His law” (Is. 42:1, 4).

Christians Are Not Lawless, But In-Lawed to Christ:
“…not being without law of God, but in-lawed (Gk.) to Christ…” (1 Cor. 9:21).

We Must Fulfill the Law of Christ:
“Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ” (Gal. 6:2).

What exactly is the law of Christ? Scripture doesn’t tell us. But, it may be all laws given by Christ and His apostles in the New Testament. Doug Moo thinks that in addition to those laws it includes the Holy Spirit’s enablement and the motivation of love…

“It is more difficult to determine whether the law of Christ includes specific teachings and principles. Many deny that this is the case, but their reasons for doing so often betray a bias against finding any specific demands as binding on Christians. The work of Schrage and others has shown that Paul and the other apostles were quite willing to impose specific commandments on their charges; and these commandments were, in fact, often drawn from, or reflective of, Jesus’ own teachings. For these reasons, I think it is highly probable that Paul thought of the law of Christ as including within it the teachings of Jesus and the apostolic witness, based on his life and teaching, about what it means to reverence God in daily life. This is not, however, to deny the importance of love or the direction of the Spirit. The ‘law of Christ,’ Paul’s shorthand expression for that form of God’s law applicable to new covenant believers, includes all these. Longenecker’s succinct summary says it well: The law of Christ stands in Paul’s thought for those ‘prescriptive principles stemming from the heart of the gospel (usually embodied in the example and teachings of Jesus), which are meant to be applied to specific situations by the direction and enablement of the Holy Spirit, being always motivated and conditioned by love.’”

Moo may be right. But, it’s not important whether the phrase “law of Christ” includes Christ’s laws alone, or also the Holy Sprit and love, since we agree they’re included in the New Testament, and crucial for obedience. Remember, this book focuses on which laws to obey (N.T.), more than how to obey (the Holy Spirit’s grace) and why to obey (love). Even as the law of Moses functioned as both regulation and revelation, so may the law of Christ.

(Excerpted from the book: “ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled”
24 Reasons Why All Old Testament Laws Are Cancelled, And All New Testament Laws Are for Our Obedience, by Greg Gibson, pp. 121-122.)

20. “But the New Covenant Law Is Written in the Heart, Not the New Testament”

Since the New Covenant law is written in the heart (Heb. 8:10), does that mean that it’s not also written in the New Testament?

Let’s explore what the words “write on the heart” mean by surveying parallel verses. We find the idea of “writing on the heart” at least 6 times in Scripture…

1. “My son, do not forget my teaching, but let your heart keep my commandments, for length of days and years of life and peace they will add to you. Let not steadfast love and faithfulness forsake you; bind them around your neck; write them on the tablet of your heart” (Pr. 3:1-3).

2. “My son, keep my words and treasure up my commandments with you; keep my commandments and live; keep my teaching as the apple of your eye; bind them on your fingers; write them on the tablet of your heart” (Pr. 7:1-3).

3. “The sin of Judah is written with a pen of iron, with a point of diamond it is engraved on the tablet of their heart, and on the horns of their altars, while their children remember their altars and their Asherim” (Jer. 17:1-2).

4.-5. “I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people” (Jer. 31:33; cf. Heb. 8:10).

6. “You yourselves are our letter of recommendation, written on our hearts (loved by us), to be known and read by all. And you show that you are a letter from Christ delivered by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts” (2 Cor. 3:2-3).

In addition to those 6 passages, there are at least 3 similar passages about binding God’s commands on the heart and body. This is significant because in Pr. 3:3 and 7:3 above, “write commands on the tablet of your heart” = “bind them around your neck/ fingers” = “keep My commands.” So, writing on the heart, binding on the body, and obeying are likely synonyms from Hebrew parallelism.

“My son, keep your father’s commandment, and forsake not your mother’s teaching. Bind them on your heart always; tie them around your neck” (Pr. 6:20-21; cf. 1:9).

“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart…You shall bind them as a sign on your hand…” (Deut. 6:4-8).

“And if you will indeed obey my commandments…You shall therefore lay up these words of mine in your heart and in your soul, and you shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. You shall teach them to your children…” (Deut. 11:13, 18-19).

“And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart” (Deut. 6:6).

“You shall therefore lay up these words of mine in your heart and in your soul…” (Deut. 11:18).

“I desire to do your will, O my God; your law is within my heart” (Ps. 40:8).

“I have stored up your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you” (Ps. 119:11).

Antinomianism errs by reading the word “only” into Heb. 8:10, like this, “I will put my laws into their minds, and write them (ONLY) on their hearts (not in the New Testament)…”

Remember earlier, we saw that Old Covenant saints probably already had all 7 New Covenant blessings from Jer. 31:31-34, including the law written both in their hearts and the Old Testament. So, New Covenant saints can also have the New Covenant law of Christ written both in their hearts and the New Testament.

In Hebrew and Greek, the heart is the center of the mind, emotions, will, desires, etc. So, God writing His New Covenant law in our hearts is a metaphor meaning He will regenerate our hearts to remember, love, and obey His laws.

Plus, since the law in the heart is a metaphor, we need to be careful about trying to reason additional doctrine from it. The hermeneutics of metaphor will not allow us to reason, “Since God’s law is written in the heart, therefore it is not written in the New Testament.”

Metaphors communicate that A is like B in some ways, but not all ways. So, beware of pressing a metaphor’s details since it’s designed to illustrate only some truths. Metaphors, parables, and types are all designed to symbolize major themes, not details.

In conclusion, God writing His laws on our hearts has nothing to do with content or location, that is, the heart instead of the New Testament. “…God’s love has been poured into our hearts…” (Rom. 5:5) does not mean that His love is not also recorded in Scripture. He wrote His law in the New Testament, and made it precious to our regenerate hearts, guaranteeing our obedience.

(Excerpted from the book: “ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled”
24 Reasons Why All Old Testament Laws Are Cancelled, And All New Testament Laws Are for Our Obedience, by Greg Gibson, pp. 115-117.)

18. “But We’re Not Under Law, But Under Grace”

Yes, we’re not under law, but under grace. But, what does that mean? (By the way, the Bible never contrasts law and gospel. But, it contrasts law and grace twice.) Here are the 2 key passages…

“Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness. For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness?” (Rom. 6:14-15).

“And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (Jn. 1:16).

What do those 2 passages tell us about law and grace? Here are 3 clear facts about law and grace…

1. The relationship between law and grace is a contrast, not a comparison. (See the word “but” in Rom. 6.)

2. In John 1:16, law and grace refer to 2 different times in redemptive history: Law was from the time of Moses – Christ (~1445 B.C. - 30 A.D.) and grace is from the time of Christ – the end (~30 A.D. - the end). Therefore, not under law, but under grace refers to redemption accomplished for the corporate Church in the 1st century, not the time of Moses.

3. In Rom. 6:14, law and grace refer to 2 different lifestyles: sin vs. obedience. (Most in Israel were characterized by sin, but all in the Church are characterized by obedience.) Therefore, not under law, but under grace also refers to redemption applied to individuals in the 1st - 21st centuries.

Some historic Dispensationalists believed there was no grace during the time of law. But, that view is easily disproved by a simple, concordance topical word study…

“But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD” (Gen. 6:8).

“…you (Moses) have found grace in My sight” (Ex. 33:12).

“Toward the scorners He is scornful, but to the humble He gives grace” (Prov. 3:34).

And, some modern Antinomians believe there is no law during the time of grace. However, that view is also easily disproved from a concordance…

“Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ” (Gal. 6:2).

“I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts…” (Heb. 8:10).

“He will bring forth justice to the nations…coastlands shall wait for His law” (Is. 42:1, 4).

“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them…teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you….” (Mt. 28:19-20; cf. Jn. 14:15, 14:21, 15:10; Acts 1:2; 1 Th. 4:2; 1 Cor. 7:19; 1 Jn. 2:3, 3:22, 3:24, 5:2-3; 2 Jn. 6; Rev. 12:17).

Therefore, just as there was grace during the time of law, so there is law during the time of grace. There are grace and truth in the Old Testament, and law in the New Testament. Whatever it means to be under grace today, does not exclude laws.

So then, what exactly does it mean to be under law vs. under grace? It probably means to be under the authority of one of 2 covenants…

• The covenant from ~1445 B.C. - 30 A.D. vs. the covenant from ~30 A.D. - the end
• The covenant characterized by sin vs. the covenant characterized by obedience
• The law covenant vs. the grace covenant
• The Old Covenant vs. the New Covenant

Why then, is the Old Covenant called “law,” and the New Covenant called “grace?” Here is the likely reason…

Old Covenant “sanctification” blessings were based on law (works), while New Covenant blessings are based on promise (grace).

(Excerpted from the book: “ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled”
24 Reasons Why All Old Testament Laws Are Cancelled, And All New Testament Laws Are for Our Obedience, by Greg Gibson, pp. 109-111.)

1. Gentile Heathen and Converts Have Never Testified to Knowing About the Sabbath Written on Their Hearts

It’s a fact, no Gentile heathen has ever testified to knowing about the Sabbath on his conscience. And, no Gentile heathen convert has ever testified to knowing about the Sabbath on his heart from regeneration. There’s no evidence that God has ever written the whole Decalogue on any human heart from creation, or from regeneration.

These 2 unquestionable facts alone should be enough to end all debate about whether the Sabbath and the whole Decalogue are universal laws for Gentiles. The theory that the Sabbath is written on the heart has as much evidence as evolution.

2. Genesis 2:2-3 Is a Description, Not a Prescription

Genesis 2:2-3 is a creation description, not a prescription, or creation ordinance (command). God created, God blessed, and God rested, period! Adam didn’t create, Adam didn’t bless, and Adam didn’t rest from creating. Adam could not have rested from creating because he didn’t create.

There’s no more evidence that Adam rested from creating than did the angels, animals, or serpent. Plus, the 7th day was only Adam’s 2nd day. (Although, Adam didn’t rest for 24 hours, but he may have entered into God’s eternal rest.)

Contrary to popular Sabbatarian belief, Exodus 20:11 does not necessarily make God’s creation rest in Genesis 2:2-3 our motive for keeping the Sabbath.

“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy…For in six days the LORD made the heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day…” (Ex. 20:8, 11).

Was God’s creation rest Israel’s motive or model for keeping the Sabbath? More likely, it was their model since the Lord gave them a different motive (redemption from Egypt) in Deuteronomy 5:15.

“You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the LORD your God commanded you to keep the Sabbath day” (Deut. 5:15).

3. Gen. 2:2-3 Is God’s Eternal Rest, Not Man’s 24-Hour, Weekly Rest

“…His works were finished from the foundation of the world” (Heb. 4:3c).

Since God ceased from creating, His rest was eternal, not 24 hours. He didn’t start re-creating on the 8th day. And, obviously He didn’t rest again every 7th day (the 14th day, 21st day, etc.) from His work of creating. In other words, this is God’s eternal rest (Heb. 4:3, 11), not the 24-hour, weekly Sabbath rest given later in Exodus.

The Sabbath has 2 functions in redemptive history…

1. Eternal rest before the Fall, and by faith in Christ after the Fall (Gen. 2:2-3; Col. 2:16-17; Heb. 4:3, 11).

2. The Old Covenant sign/shadow of eschatological, eternal rest by faith in Christ (Ex. 31:13-17; Col. 2:16-17).

Beware of confusing the mere sign/shadow in Exodus 20 with the reality in Genesis 2. God created the human Sabbath in Exodus 16 to testify to His divine rest in Genesis 2, and coming in Christ.

4. God Introduced the Sabbath in the Wilderness and Placed it in the Middle of the Decalogue Because it Was the Sign of the Covenant

Archaeology testifies that the reason God placed the Sabbath in the middle of 9 universal laws was because in ancient, near east treaties, kings often placed the sign of the covenant in the middle of the covenant document.

But, why did the Jews keep the Sabbath in the wilderness (Ex. 16) before the Old Covenant started? Remember when Christ celebrated the Lord’s Supper (the sign of the New Covenant) before the New Covenant started, when He shed the blood of the covenant on the Cross? Apparently, covenant parties often celebrated the sign before putting the covenant into effect.

God first “gave” and “revealed” the Sabbath in the Wilderness, not Eden…

“Mt. Sinai…you made known to them your holy Sabbath…” (Neh. 9:14).

“So I led them out of the land of Egypt and brought them into the wilderness…I gave them My Sabbaths…” (Ezek. 20:10, 12).

If they already knew the Sabbath from creation, then how could God make it known in the Wilderness? And, if they already had the Sabbath, then how could He give it to them? Notice in Exodus 16, there’s no rebuke to restore the Sabbath. And, He had to explain the instructions on how to keep it because they had never heard.

There’s no evidence that Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob kept the Sabbath. That’s because God introduced the 24-hour, weekly Sabbath in the wilderness, not at creation. (By the way, did you know that the Orthodox Jewish rabbis agree that God first gave the Sabbath to Israel in the wilderness, not Adam at creation?)

5. It’s Impossible That God Changed the Sabbath Day, Because He Still Calls Saturday the Sabbath 13 Times After Christ Rose

It’s 100% impossible that God changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday, after Christ rose. We can know this for certain because He still calls Saturday the Sabbath (the day when the Jews met in the synagogue) 5 times in Acts.

“…And on the Sabbath day they went into the synagogue and sat down” (Acts 13:14, cf. 13:27, 15:21, 17:1-2, 18:4, cf. 13:42, 13:44, 16:13).

Plus, God still calls Sunday the “first (day) from the Sabbath” 8 times (Greek: mia Sabbaton, or protos Sabbaton: Mt. 28:1; Mk. 16:2; 16:9; Lk. 24:1; Jn. 20:1, 20:19; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2). So, if anyone tries to tell you that God changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday, just tell them, “Mia sabbaton.”

Saturday was still THE only Sabbath. Obviously, there could not have been 2 Sabbaths: A Jewish Sabbath on Saturday, followed by a Christian Sabbath on Sunday. In light of these 13 post-resurrection mentions of the Saturday Sabbath, it is impossible that God changed the Sabbath to Sunday.

6. Jewish Authors Criticized the Sabbath Without Exceptions

When I say that the apostles “criticized” the Sabbath and the law, I mean they criticized their misapplication, not as though God made a mistake.

It’s unthinkable that a Jewish author like Paul could believe the Sabbath was still binding when he omitted any exceptions in his 3, negative criticisms of the Sabbath (Rom. 14:5-6; Gal. 4:10; Col. 2:16-17). And, surely if the author of Hebrews believed the Sabbath was transferred to Sunday, he would have explained it in Hebrews 4, right?

Have you ever heard a Sabbatarian teach on any of those passages say, “BUT, we know that can’t include the Christian Sabbath?” Paul never said “but” because he didn’t believe in Sabbatarianism. Just try substituting Sabbatarian exceptions into the verses below, and see how ridiculous they sound…

“Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath (except the weekly, Christian Sabbath). These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ” (Col. 2:16-17).

“One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days (except the weekly, Christian Sabbath) alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind” (Rom. 14:5-6).

“…how can you turn back again to the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world, whose slaves you want to be once more? You observe days (except the weekly, Christian Sabbath) and months and seasons and years!” (Gal. 4:9-10).

Can you imagine a Jewish author omitting exceptions like that?

7. We Enter Into God’s Eternal Sabbath Rest by Believing the Gospel

“For the gospel came to us…For we who have believed enter that rest” (Heb. 4:2-3).

In Scripture, there are 2 Sabbaths:

1. The big Sabbath: God’s eternal rest (Gen. 2; Heb. 4)
2. The little Sabbath: Man’s 24-hour, weekly rest (Ex. 16, Ex. 20)

The context of Hebrews 3:11 - 4:11 is God’s eternal rest, not man’s 24-hour, weekly rest. The words for “rest” appear 12 times, always meaning God’s eternal rest, never man’s 24-hour, weekly rest.

But, why does Hebrews 4:9 change the word to “Sabbath-keeping?” Because we are keeping Sabbath by resting in Christ, since we believe the gospel (just like we are circumcised, and keeping Passover in Christ). Notice how the context of v. 9 (before in v. 8 and after in v. 10) speaks of God’s eternal rest, not man’s 24-hour rest…

“For if Joshua had given them (eternal) rest, God would not have spoken of another day later on. So then, there remains a (eternal) Sabbath-keeping for the people of God, for whoever has entered God’s (eternal) rest has also rested from his works as God did (eternally) from His” (Heb. 4:8-10).

And in Hebrews 4, notice how the 2 other verses with the word “remains” refer to God’s eternal Sabbath rest, not man’s 24-hour, Sabbath rest…

“Therefore, while the promise of entering His (eternal) rest still remains…” (Heb. 4:1).

“They shall not enter My (eternal) rest. Since therefore it remains for some to enter (My eternal rest)…” (Heb. 4:5-6).

“So then, there remains a (eternal) Sabbath-keeping for the people of God” (Heb. 4:9).

So in Hebrews 4, all 12 uses of “rest” refer to God’s eternal rest, not man’s 24-hour, weekly rest. And, all 3 uses of “remains” refer to God’s eternal rest, not man’s 24-hour, weekly rest. This is the big Sabbath, not the little Sabbath.

This eternal rest of God is the same salvation rest that Jesus invites us to enter: “Come to Me, all those tired of working, and burdened, and I will give you rest…You will find rest for your souls.” (Mt. 11:28-29).

(Excerpted from the book: “ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled”
24 Reasons Why All Old Testament Laws Are Cancelled, And All New Testament Laws Are for Our Obedience, by Greg Gibson, pp. 30-35.)

2. “But Jesus Did Not Come to Abolish the Law”

For regulation, or revelation? As Old Covenant contract, or Old Testament Scripture?

Here’s a puzzle for you. Which verses are true: Those on the left or right?

Of course, they’re both true if we believe the Bible is inerrant and inspired by the same sovereign Spirit of God. So, how can we harmonize that the law is abolished, but not abolished?

One reason why this question of the law in the New Testament may be the most complex issue in theology is Paul’s seemingly contradictory praise and criticism for the law of Moses. (No, Paul was not a schizophrenic!)

John Owen, the Puritan theologian, had it right when he distinguished 2 important meanings of the word “law.”

“The law is taken two ways:

1. For the whole revelation of the mind and will of God in the Old Testament…

2. The covenant rule of perfect obedience: ‘Do this, and live.’ In this sense men are said to be ‘under it, in opposition unto being ‘under grace.’ They are under its power, rule, conditions, and authority, as a covenant.”

Wayne Strickland explains the distinction between regulation vs. revelation…

“…the Mosaic law had a revelatory aspect and regulatory aspect…The revelatory aspect was in mind when Paul discussed the merits of the law…Armed with this understanding of the twofold purpose of the law, the seemingly contradictory assertions of Paul concerning the law may be understood in a harmonious manner.”

Another way to explain this distinction is Old Covenant vs. Old Testament. However, that distinction may be confusing since Christians often use those 2 terms synonymously. Yet, if we view those terms historically, the distinction is valid, since the Old Testament starts from Creation, while the Old Covenant starts from Sinai. Old Covenant and Old Testament may be distinguished, but not separated, since Genesis is the introduction to the Old Covenant.

Paul’s negative statements about the law often refer to regulation (Old Covenant contract). And, his positive statements often refer to revelation (Old Testament Scripture). This is the solution to harmonize many of Paul’s seemingly contradictory statements on the law.

So, the word “law” has multiple meanings in Scripture. Two of the most important meanings are:

1. Law regulation (Old Covenant contract).
2. Law revelation (Old Testament Scripture).

Those 2 distinctions in the word “law” are clearly demonstrated in these 3 verses…

“…whatever the law says (as Old Testament revelation) it speaks to those who are under the law (as Old Covenant regulation)…” (Rom. 3:19).

“But, now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law (as Old Covenant regulation), although the Law (Pentateuch) and the Prophets (as Old Testament revelation) bear witness to it.” (Rom. 3:21).

“Tell me, you who desire to be under the law (as Old Covenant regulation), do you not listen to the law (as Old Testament revelation?)” (Gal. 4:21).

There are several other verses demonstrating the Law’s revelational function as Old Testament Scripture…

“…What is written in the Law? How do you read it?” (Lk. 10:26; cf. Mt. 12:5; Lk. 2:23; Jn 8:17, 10:34, 15:25; 2 Cor. 3:14; etc.)

The Law is written, read, heard, and it speaks. That means the law was more than just commands to be obeyed or disobeyed. Do you see the distinction between Old Covenant regulation for obedience vs. Old Testament revelation for doctrine? We use the Old Testament today for doctrine/faith, but not practice.

Now, let’s apply that distinction between law as regulation vs. revelation to the most crucial passage for understanding our relationship to Old Testament law: The Sermon on the Mount. Here are 2 different interpretations of this key passage…

*Covenant theologians have multiple interpretations of this passage. For example, some believe “these commands” refers to Christ’s and Moses’ commands, since “they must be the same.”

In Matthew 5:17, the Greek word “plerosai” is crucial to understanding the whole sermon that Jesus is about to preach. Many earlier Covenant Theologians interpreted “plerosai” as “confirm.” They taught that Jesus was confirming/establishing the Decalogue for our obedience.

However, some recent Covenant Theologians have conceded that their forefathers’ were wrong because Matthew’s normal meaning for “pleroo” refers to eschatological, prophetic, and/or typological fulfillment. (Besides, if Matthew meant “confirm” or “establish” then he should have chosen the Greek words “bebaioo” or “histemi.”)

In the 2 passages above, we see 3 parallels:

1. The Law and Prophets
2. All/everything
3. Fulfill/accomplished

So, just as Luke 24:44 refers to fulfilling prophecy instead of confirming the Decalogue for obedience, so does Matthew 5:17-18.

Matthew’s normal meaning for “pleroo” is eschatological fulfillment (not obedience) as shown in these 12 examples…

“All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet” (Mt. 1:22).

“…This was to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet…” (Mt. 2:15).

“Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah” (Mt. 2:17).

“…that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled…” (Mt. 2:23).

“so that what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled” (Mt. 4:14).

“This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah…” (Mt. 8:17).

“This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah” (Mt. 12:17).

“This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet” (Mt. 13:35).

“This took place to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet, saying” (Mt. 21:4).

“But how then should the Scriptures be fulfilled that it must be so?” (Mt. 26:54).

“But all this has taken place that the Scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled” (Mt. 26:56).

“Then was fulfilled what had been spoken by the prophet Jeremiah, saying” (Mt. 27:9).

Notice that all those uses of “pleroo” refer to revelation (Old Testament), not regulation (Old Covenant). And, it’s the same in the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus came to fulfill the Old Testament prophecies and types as revelation, not to confirm the Old Covenant Decalogue alone for regulation.

In the first century, the goal of redemptive history finally started arriving when Messiah fulfilled prophecy as the better Prophet, better Priest, and better King. As the new Prophet, He gave new prophecies and teachings. As the new Priest, He made a new sacrifice. And, as the new King, He gave a new law.

Yes, Christ did not come to destroy the law or prophets. And, what is the meaning of the phrase “law or prophets” (cf. “law and prophets”)?

It never once means “Ten Commandments and prophets.” It always means the “Pentateuch and prophets,” a.k.a. “Genesis - Deuteronomy and the Prophets,” a.k.a. the “whole Old Testament.”

John MacArthur agrees that “Law or Prophets” refers to the whole Old Testament and its continuing revelation…

“The phrase ‘the Law and the Prophets’ speaks of the entirety of the OT Scriptures…Here Christ emphasizes both the inspiration and the enduring authority of all Scripture. He specifically affirms the utter inerrancy and absolute authority of the OT as the Word of God - down to the least jot and tittle. Again (see note on v. 17), we should not think that the NT supplants or completely abrogates the OT but instead fulfills and explicates it. For example, all the ceremonial requirements of the Mosaic Law are fulfilled in Christ and are no longer to be observed by Christians (Col. 2:16, 17). Yet not one jot or tittle is thereby erased; the underlying truths of those Scriptures remain…”

And, Don Carson agrees that Christ is speaking of not destroying the Old Testament…

“In no case does this ‘abolish’ the Old Testament as canon, any more than the obsolescence of the Levitical sacrificial system abolishes tabernacle ritual as canon.”

So, Christ did not come to destroy “Genesis - Deuteronomy or the Prophets.” In other words, He did not come to destroy the law as Old Testament revelation. (The error that the Old Testament was abolished as Scripture was popularized later in church history by the heretic Marcion.)

In Matthew 5:19, does the phrase “these commandments” refer to Moses’ commands or Christ’s commands? (Although, some Covenant Theologians think that Moses’ commands = Christ’s commands.)

1. Since “Law or Prophets” Means “the Whole Old Testament,” Then if “These Commandments” Means “Moses’ Laws” it Must Include All of Moses’ Laws

Since “Law or Prophets” means “the whole Old Testament,” Covenant Theology is trapped in a dilemma…

1. Christ did not come to abolish the Law or Prophets (whole O.T.)
2. We can’t relax one of Moses’ commands (from the whole O.T.)
3. Therefore, we must obey all of Moses’ commands (from the whole O.T.)

Do you see Covenant Theology’s problem? Since “Law or Prophets” clearly means the “whole Old Testament,” if “these commands” means “Moses commands,” then we must obey every jot and tittle of all Old Testament commands, including the Ten Commandments, and so-called “civil and ceremonial laws.”

But, if “these commands” means Christ’s commands, then the dilemma is solved. “Christ’s commands” is far less problematic.

2. Both the Sermon on the Mount and its Parallel Sermon on the Plain Emphasize Obeying Christ’s Words

In the Sermon on the Mount (Mt. 5:1 – 7:29) and the Sermon on the Plain (Lk. 6:20 - 7:1) Christ tells us to do (obey) His words…

“Everyone then who hears these words of Mine and does them…And everyone who hears these words of Mine and does not do them…” (Mt. 7:24, 26. The conclusion to the Sermon on the Mount).

“Everyone who comes to Me and hears My words and does them…But the one who hears and does not do them…” (Lk. 6:47, 49).

“After he had finished all His sayings in the hearing of the people…” (Lk. 7:1).

“teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you…” (cf. Mt. 28:20, by the same author).

In these verses above, there is much evidence that Christ is speaking of His commands.

3. The Sermon on the Mount Includes at Least 7 Commands Not in the Decalogue

Another reason that Christ could not have been referring to Moses’ commands is that the Sermon on the Mount includes several topics not even in the Decalogue, such as:

1. Retaliation
2. Love your enemies
3. Giving
4. Prayer
5. Money
6. Worry
7. Judging

So, those topics were all Jesus’ commands, not Moses’ commands.

4. Since the Parallel Passage (Lk. 16:17) Says the Kingdom of God Is After John, Therefore the Commandments of the Kingdom Are After John

These 2 parallel passages share 5 ideas:

1. The Law and/or Prophets
2. Not a dot/iota of the Law
3. Will become void/pass away
4. Heaven and earth pass away
5. The Kingdom of God/heaven

In Luke 16:17, notice how “the Law and Prophets” refers to the time before Christ, while “the kingdom of God” refers to the time after Christ. So in Matthew 5:19, “these commands…in the kingdom of heaven” refers to the time of the kingdom of heaven after Christ, not the Law and Prophets before Christ…

6. “These Words” (Ex. 20:1) and “These Commandments” (Mt. 5:19) Are Parallel, and Look Forward, Not Backward

In the chart above, the last parallel is that Moses wrote, “And God spoke all these words…” (Ex. 20:1ff.) looking forward to giving His law, not backward. And, Jesus spoke about “these commandments” (Mt. 5:19ff.) looking forward to giving His law, not backward to Moses commands in “the Law and the Prophets.”

So, there are 6 reasons why “these commandments” more likely refers to “Christ’s commandments,” than “Moses’ commandments.” And, in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus spoke about not abolishing the whole law as Old Testament Scripture, but fulfilling it prophetically.

(Excerpted from the book: “ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled”
24 Reasons Why All Old Testament Laws Are Cancelled, And All New Testament Laws Are for Our Obedience, by Greg Gibson, pp. 41-51.)

Only 3 Passages, All Negative

As we saw above, the Holy Spirit never uses the names “Ten Commandments” or “moral law” in the New Testament. As a matter of fact, there are only 3 New Testament passages that definitely refer to the whole Decalogue, and they’re all negative…

1. “The letter,” “letters on stone,” and “tablets of stone” (2 Cor. 3:6-9) are:

• Not where the Spirit writes (2 Cor. 3:3)
• (What) kills (2 Cor. 3:6)
• A ministry of death (2 Cor. 3:7)
• A ministry of condemnation (2 Cor. 3:9)

2. “The handwriting of ordinances” (Col. 2:14) was:

• Blotted out (Col. 2:14)
• Taken away (Col. 2:14)
• Nailed to the cross (Col. 2:14)

3. “The tablets of the covenant” (Heb. 9:4) are:

• Obsolete (Heb. 8:13)
• Growing old (Heb. 8:13)
• Ready to vanish.” (Heb. 8:13)

(Excerpted from the book: “ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled”
24 Reasons Why All Old Testament Laws Are Cancelled, And All New Testament Laws Are for Our Obedience, by Greg Gibson, p. 25.)

When you hear the words, “Ten Commandments,” what’s the first thought that comes to your mind? If you automatically think, “The moral law of God,” then your view is very different from God’s view.

Depending on how you classify them, the whole Decalogue and its synonyms appear ~56 times in Scripture. (We’ll exclude the names “ark of the covenant,” “ark of the testimony,” and “tabernacle of the testimony,” even though they would be accurate.) And, in those 56 occurrences, God calls the Decalogue by 12 different names. Listed below, are the number of times He uses each name.

Old Testament:

14 = The tablets (Ex. 32:15, 32:16a,b, 32:19, 34:1b,c, 34:28; Deut. 9:17, 10:2a,b, 10:3, 10:4, 10:5; 2 Chr. 5:10)

13 = The tablets of stone (Ex. 24:12, 31:18, 34:1, 34:4a,b; Deut. 4:13, 5:22, 9:9, 9:10, 9:11, 10:1, 10:3; 1 Kg. 8:9)

10 = The testimony (Ex. 16:34, 25:16, 25:21, 27:21, 30:6, 30:36, 40:20; Lev. 16:13; Num 17:4, 17:10)

3 = The tablets of the testimony (Ex. 31:18, 32:15, 34:29)

3 = The tablets of the covenant (Deut. 9:9, 9:11, 9:15)

3 = The Ten Commandments (Ex. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4)

2 = The covenant (1 Kg. 8:21; 2 Chr. 6:11)

1 = The words of the covenant (Ex 34:28)

1 = His covenant (Deut. 4:13)

0 = The moral law

New Testament:

2 = The letter (2 Cor. 3:6a,b)

1 = Letters on stone (2 Cor. 3:7)

1 = Tablets of stone (2 Cor. 3:3)

1 = The handwriting of ordinances (Col. 2:14)

1 = The tablets of the covenant (Heb. 9:4)

0 = The Ten Commandments

0 = The moral law

So, when you hear the phrase “the Ten Commandments,” the first thought that should come to your mind is, “tablets (of stone”), not “moral law.” Remember, another thought that should come to your mind is “the covenant.”

Do you think of the Ten Commandments as “the tablets of stone,” and “the covenant” (Old Covenant made with Israel?) When talking about the Ten Commandments, if you have to rely on words uninspired by the Holy Spirit (like “moral law”) to explain your theology, then you probably have a different theology than the Holy Spirit.

Did you see how many times the phrase “Ten Commandments” appears in the New Testament? Zero! (Think about that.)

(Excerpted from the book: “ALL Old Testament Laws Cancelled”
24 Reasons Why All Old Testament Laws Are Cancelled And All New Testament Laws Are for Our Obedience, Greg Gibson, p. 23-24)