Conflict Between Mosaic Law and Jesus Christ's Teachings
The Mosaic Law and Jesus Christ's teachings appear to be in conflict on several issues, such as divorce and Sabbath observance. The Mosaic Law permitted divorce under certain circumstances (Deut. 24:1-4) [2, 3], while Jesus limited it to cases of adultery (Matt. 5:31, 32; 19:1-9) [2]. Similarly, the Mosaic Law commanded rest on the Sabbath, but Jesus healed on the Sabbath, sparking controversy with the Pharisees (Luke 14:1-6) [6].
Understanding the Conflict
The conflict between the Mosaic Law and Jesus' teachings is rooted in their different purposes and dispensations. The Mosaic Law was given to the Israelites as a theocratic code, governing their religious, social, and civil life [1]. In contrast, Jesus' teachings inaugurated a new dispensation, focusing on the kingdom of God and the fulfillment of the Law.
According to the Reformed tradition, Jesus did not abolish the Mosaic Law but fulfilled it, thereby changing its application and significance [4, 7]. Charles Hodge argues that the Mosaic Law had three aspects: moral, ceremonial, and judicial. While the moral law remains binding, the ceremonial and judicial aspects were abolished with the introduction of the new dispensation [5].
Resolving the Conflict
The early Church Fathers, such as Augustine and Tertullian, grappled with the apparent contradictions between the Mosaic Law and Jesus' teachings. Augustine maintained that Christ came to fulfill the Law, not destroy it, and that the Law's true meaning is revealed in Christ [7]. Tertullian, on the other hand, highlighted the differences between the Mosaic Law and the Christian dispensation, arguing that the Law was given to the Jews, while the Christian faith is universal [8, 9].
The apostle Paul's writings, particularly in Galatians and 2 Corinthians, provide insight into the relationship between the Mosaic Law and the gospel. Paul argues that the Law was a custodian, leading people to Christ, but that faith in Christ supersedes the Law's role in justification [10, 11].
The conflict between the Mosaic Law and Jesus' teachings is a complex issue, reflecting the transition from the old covenant to the new. While the Mosaic Law remains significant as a historical and theological backdrop, Jesus' teachings and the apostolic writings provide the framework for understanding the Christian faith. The early Church Fathers and Reformed theologians have contributed to the ongoing discussion, highlighting the nuances and complexities of this issue [4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. The Mosaic Law's ceremonial and judicial aspects are no longer binding, but its moral principles continue to guide Christian ethics.
Sources
- Easton's Bible Dictionary “Easton's Bible Dictionary: Law of Moses — Is the whole body of the Mosaic legislation (1 Kings 2:3; 2 Kings 23:25; Ezra 3:2). It is called by way of eminence simply "the Law" (Heb. Torah, Deut. 1:5; 4:8, 44; 17:18, 19; 27:3, 8). As a written code it is called the "book of the law of Moses" (2 Kings 14:6; Isa. 8:20), the "book of the law of God" (Josh. 24:26). The great leading principle of the Mosaic law is that it is essentially theocratic; i.e., it refers at once to the commandment of God as the foundation of all human duty.”
- Easton's Bible Dictionary “Easton's Bible Dictionary: Divorce — The dissolution of the marriage tie was regulated by the Mosaic law (Deut. 24:1-4). The Jews, after the Captivity, were reguired to dismiss the foreign women they had married contrary to the law (Ezra 10:11-19). Christ limited the permission of divorce to the single case of adultery. It seems that it was not uncommon for the Jews at that time to dissolve the union on very slight pretences (Matt. 5:31, 32; 19:1-9; Mark 10:2-12; Luke 16:18). These precepts given by Christ regulate the law of divorce in the Christian Church.”
- Torrey's Topical Textbook “Torrey's Topical Textbook: Divorce — Law of marriage against -- Ge 2:24; Mt 19:6. Permitted By the Mosaic law. -- De 24:1. On account of hardness of heart. -- Mt 19:8. Often sought by the Jews -- Mic 2:9; Mal 2:14. Sought on slight grounds -- Mt 5:31; 19:3. Not allowed to those who falsely accused their wives -- De 22:18,19. Women Could obtain. -- Pr 2:17; Mr 10:12. Could marry after. -- De 24:2. Responsible for vows after. -- Nu 30:9. Married after, could not return to first husband. -- De 24:3,4; Jer 3:1. Afflicted by. -- Isa 54:4,6. Priests not to marry women after -- Le 21:14. Of servants,”
- CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 74: but Christ, who surpasses all the perfection of the law, is alone to be held forth for righteousness. 3. On this almost the whole subject of the Epistle to the Galatians hinges; for it can be proved from express passages that those are absurd interpreters who teach that Paul there contends only for freedom from ceremonies. Of such passages are the following: “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us.” “Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, and be not entangled ag”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 39: the obligation of any divine law, which He has imposed upon them. (2.) That with regard to the positive laws of the Old Testament, and such judicial enactments as were designed exclusively for the Hebrews living under the theocracy, they were all abolished by the introduction of the new dispensation. We are no longer under obligation to circumcise our children, to keep the Passover, or feast of tabernacles or to go up 270 three times in the year to Jerusalem, or to exact an eye for an eye, or a tooth for a tooth. (3.) With regard to those”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 46: and Pharisees, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath day? And they held their peace. And he took him, and healed him, and let him go. . . . . And he put forth a parable to those which were bidden, when he marked how they chose out the chief rooms; saying unto them,” etc., etc. This was evidently a large entertainment to which guests were “bidden.” Christ, therefore, thought right, in the 340 prosecution of his work, to attend on such entertainments on the Sabbath. The frequency with which our Lord was accused of Sabbath-breaking by ”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 4: Augustine — Anti-Manichaean, Anti-Donatist — BOOK XIX. (part 6): or acknowledge that Christ himself has already destroyed them; and from this acknowledgment it must follow, either that this text is spurious in which Christ is made to say that he came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it, or that the words have an entirely different meaning from what you suppose. 7. AUGUSTIN replied: If you allow, in consideration of the authority of the Gospel, that Christ said that He came not to destroy the law and the prophets, but to fulfill them, you should show the same consideration to”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 3: Tertullian — CHAP.XIX.--JESUS CHRIST, THE REVEALER OF THE CREATOR, COULD NOT BE THE SAME AS MARCION'S GOD, WHO WAS ONLY MADE KNOWN BY THE HERETIC SOME CXV. YEARS AFTER CHRIST, AND THAT, TOO, ON A PRINCIPLE UTTERLY (part 2): also. Since, therefore, it is this very opposition between the law and the gospel which has suggested that the God of the gospel is different from the God of the law, it is clear that, before the said separation, that god could not have been known who became known(3) from the argument of the separation itself. He therefore could not have been revealed by Christ, ”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 4: Tertullian IV, Minucius Felix, Commodian, Origen — CHAP. IV. (part 1): The Jew, then, continues his address to converts from his own nation thus: "Yesterday and the day before, when we visited with punishment the man who deluded you, ye became apostates from the law of your fathers;" showing by such statements (as we have just demonstrated) anything but an exact knowledge of the truth. But what he advances afterwards seems to have some force, when he says: "How is it that you take the beginning of your system from our worship, and when you have made some progress you treat it with d”
- Galatians (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Galatians 3:21: 3:21-25 See Rom 7:7-13. 3:21 No conflict of purpose exists between law and promise, or between law and faith. Law partners with the promise in bringing people to faith in Christ. Law has its proper roles of declaring people prisoners of sin (3:19, 22) and of restraining sin (3:23-25). In Galatia, the Judaizers tried to convince Gentile Christians that the law could do something it was never intended to do—give . . . new life and make people right with God. God does these things on the basis of faith in his promise, which was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (see 3:22)”
- 2 Corinthians (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on 2 Corinthians 3:4: 3:4-18 The contrast between Paul’s ministry and the others’ ministries leads Paul to contrast the old covenant of written laws (Exod 31:18) with the new covenant written on human hearts (Jer 31:33). 3:4-6 The old written covenant is the Mosaic law as interpreted by the Jewish rabbis. It ends in death for adherents who see it as a way of salvation. The law is good (Rom 7:12-14), but those who use it to gain merit fail. It leads either to transgression or to pride; either way, the law brings condemnation (2 Cor 3:9).”