Posted on 02/21/2003 7:40:29 PM PST by DouglasKC
Galatians 3:19
The word circumcision (or its derivative) is used 54 times in the entire New Testament. Sixteen occurrences of this word, about 30 percent, are found in one single book-the book of Galatians. The only New Testament book that uses this word more is the book of Romans, where it is used 26 times (48 percent). Interestingly, these are two of the most misinterpreted books in traditional Christianity. And Galatians 3:19 is often a major part of this misunderstanding.
What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator (Galatians 3:19).
This verse can be broken down into four parts:
1. the law 2. added because of transgressions 3. till the Seed should come 4. appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator.
Examination of these four parts should make it clear that the Ten Commandments are not part of the "law" being discussed in this verse, as we will see.
Part 1: "the law"
Some people in the early Church had gotten off track by coming to believe that they could "earn" salvation by something they did, thus not fully (or even at all, in some cases) appreciating the sacrifice of Christ and our utter dependence on it, coupled with the Father’s merciful willingness to apply it to our sins.
The Jews had corrupted the law of God by adding a lot of human traditions, reasoning and practices, for example, (1) the perversion of the intent of "honor your father and mother" with their "Corban" escape clause, and (2) ceremonially washing their hands before eating.
"Judaizing" elements in the early Church had influenced some people to believe that being circumcised and adopting the legal and, perhaps, judicial requirements of Judaism were necessary for a person to be accepted as a Christian.
Some of the laws of God revealed to Moses and then to the nation of Israel were meant to be temporary. They are no longer in force and are not obligatory for a Christian. For example, the entire set of "fleshly ordinances"-including animal sacrifices, temple liturgy and practices of the Levites and washings, among other things-are no longer imperatives for Christians, who constitute the Israel of God (see accompanying chart and commentary at the end of this appendix). In addition, the physical administration of penalties for breaking the law (the "ministration of death") was temporary, as Paul explains in 2 Corinthians 3. The knowledge and awareness of and obedient devotion to keeping the "moral" law of God preceded Sinai, since Abraham (the father of the faithful) kept God’s laws, commandments and statutes-though it is possible that they were never all written down (codified) at one time before Sinai.
In Galatians 3:19, was Paul using "the law" in the context of the entire Old Covenant? Was Paul essentially saying, "What purpose does the entire Old Covenant serve? It was added because of transgressions…"?
A covenant is typically based on laws, and composed of obligations that are then binding as law. Thus, there are passages where "law" and "covenant" can be used interchangeably without contradicting the intent of the scripture. For example:
For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them" (Galatians 3:10).
This is the only time the term "book of the law" is recorded in the New Testament. The "book of the law" is also called the "Book of the Covenant" (Exodus 24:7; 2 Kings 23:2; 2 Chronicles 34:30). So in Galatians 3:10, Paul could have noted the "book of the covenant" without altering the intent of this verse.
Nevertheless, these terms do have different meanings. A covenant is an agreement. A law is an instruction. So there are times when it would be incorrect to use these words interchangeably. In the Old Testament, the term "Book of the Law" or "Book of the Covenant" was held in contrast to the "tablets of the covenant" (Deuteronomy 9:9, 11, 15; Hebrews 9:4). When God referred to the "tablets of the covenant," He distinguished the Ten Commandments from the set of laws contained in the "Book of the Law." These two sets of laws clearly were not the same, though the "Book of the Law" complemented the principles outlined in the Ten Commandments.
So even if "law" was replaced by "covenant" in Galatians 3:10, it still points to something other than the Ten Commandments. The "Book of the Covenant" contained the curses imposed because of transgressions.
And the Lord would separate him from all the tribes of Israel for adversity, according to all the curses of the covenant that are written in this Book of the Law (Deuteronomy 29:21-22).
When Christ became a "curse for us" (Galatians 3:13), He replaced the curses, all of which were written in the "Book of the Covenant," not the tablets of the covenant. The reason they were under a curse is because "the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices…make those who approach perfect" (Hebrews 10:1).
The ultimate curse is the death penalty for having broken God’s law. All humanity is under that curse (Romans 3:23; 6:23). But how is that curse to be eliminated? The various fleshly ordinances, including sacrifices, could not do it-"For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins" (Hebrews 10:4). But the sacrifice of Christ does eliminate that curse. Therefore the temporary, insufficient fleshly ordinances, not the Ten Commandments, constituted the law that was only until the Seed should come.
Take this Book of the Law, and put it beside the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there as a witness against you (Deuteronomy 31:26).
Moses said that the "Book of the Law," not the tablets of the law, was a "witness against you." The tablets of the covenant were put "in the ark" (Exodus 25:21; Deuteronomy 10:2, 5; 1 Kings 8:9; 2 Chronicles 5:10). The "Book of the Law" was placed alongside or "beside" the ark (Deuteronomy 31:26).
The writer of Hebrews, most likely the apostle Paul, also referred to the "covenant," the "law" and the "book." In Hebrews 8:7, he noted the "covenant": "For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second." In Hebrews 9:19, Paul referred to the "book," meaning the "Book of the Covenant": "For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood…and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people." And in Hebrews 10:1, Paul referred to the "law," meaning the fleshly ordinances: "For the law…can never with these same sacrifices…make those who approach perfect."
Notice that the "first covenant" was not "faultless." However, the fault was not with the Ten Commandments, nor any other law of God. The fault was with the people (Hebrews 8:8). It was not in their heart to keep the laws of God (Deuteronomy 5:29). So God initiates a New Covenant in which the people are enabled to obey. It is for this reason that Paul quotes the promise of God: "I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts" (Hebrews 8:10).
God revealed and commanded many imperatives at Sinai. Some of what was commanded was temporary (until the Seed should come) or social laws, and the rest was the fundamental, eternal, spiritual law of God. When the term the law is used in the Bible, it is important to discern from the context and from other scriptures whether the term refers to every law, or whether it refers to only one or more portions of what was revealed and commanded at Sinai.
It’s a mistake to assume that "law" must mean the entire set of covenant obligations. Actually, Paul’s use of the words law and covenant reflects the fact that he meant one or the other in his respective use of them. The controversy in Galatia concerned "the book of the law" (Galatians 3:10), not the tablets of the law.
Much confusion over Paul’s writings has resulted from the misinterpretation of the term law, which is also used more in the books of Galatians (32 times) and Romans (78 times) than other New Testament books. This confusion is due largely to the mistake of seeing circumcision as a generic term for the totality of all law
It is clear that Paul uses the term the law (Greek nomos) in a number of different ways. He sometimes uses the term the law to refer to a subset of all that God commanded. That is, there are instances when he is clearly referring to only a portion of the laws that were commanded. Other times he uses "the law" to refer to something other than any of God’s law. Some examples follow.
Romans 2:26: "Therefore, if an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements of the [ho] law [nomos], will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision?" Obviously, "the law" here cannot include circumcision and related obligations, since Paul clearly states "an uncircumcised man."
Romans 2:27: "And will not the physically uncircumcised, if he fulfills the [ho] law [nomos], judge you who, even with your written code and circumcision, are a transgressor of the [ho] law?" The "law" here cannot include circumcision. Otherwise Paul would not have said that the "physically uncircumcised" had already fulfilled it.
Romans 7:23: "But I see another law in my members, warring against the [ho] law [nomos] of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members." Paul is not referring to the law of God in this verse. He is referring to that which we call human nature. It acts as a law in our members. Here the modifier-"of my mind"-dictates how "the law" is defined. Therefore, the interpretation of "the law" is subject to the context and modifiers in a given verse.
Romans 8:7: "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the [ho] law [nomos] of God, nor indeed can be." Paul is referring to the fundamental law of God that we are subject to. Of course, this would not include anything temporary, such as physical circumcision, sacrifices or rituals. Nor would it refer to any laws that are not applicable under certain circumstances. If "the law" here denotes the entire law, then anyone not subject to circumcision would be carnally-minded, which would contradict many of Paul’s own writings (i.e., Romans 2:26-27).
Galatians 6:2: "Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the [ho] law [nomos] of Christ." Of course, physical circumcision is not part of "the law" here. It’s a mistake to broadly define "law" as though it always means the same thing.
Hebrews 7:12-13: "For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. For He of whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no man has officiated at the altar." Notice that the "law" that was changed had to do with the priesthood. A change was necessary in order to transfer the priesthood from Levi to Christ. However, when the priesthood changed, the Ten Commandments remained intact.
Hebrews 10:1: "For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect." The Levitical laws were a shadow of things to come. They taught lessons about the ultimate sacrifice, Jesus Christ. One might say that they were a tutor or substitute teacher until the Seed should come.
Hebrews 10:8: "‘Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them’ (which are offered according to the law)." Sacrifices were offered according to the priestly laws, not the Ten Commandments.
1 Corinthians 7:19: "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters." The "commandments" here obviously cannot include circumcision and related laws. This is similar to Romans 2:26-27.
All of these verses, and more, support Paul’s assorted use of "the law." Therefore one should not assume that the entire law is automatically intended in Galatians 3:19.
Consistent with these examples, Paul refers to "the law" in Galatians 3:19 to mean only a portion of what was given at Sinai-specifically, the temporary "fleshly ordinances" that are no longer required of Christians now that the Seed has come.
Part 2: "It was added because of transgressions"
In what way was the "law" in Galatians 3:19 "because of transgressions"? Some interpret "because" as being causal-as the result of previous transgressions (1 John 3:12). For example, the ceremonial, fleshly ordinances were the result of previous transgressions and served as a "reminder of sins" (Hebrews 10:1, 3). Others interpret "because" as meaning-for the purpose of showing transgressions (see Titus 1:5). For example, the law was given for the reason of making transgressions more blatant or "exceedingly sinful" (Romans 7:13).
Which one of these applications is intended in Galatians 3:19? The answer to this question lies in the next clause in this verse-"until the Seed should come." The "law" of Galatians 3:19 served in one of the two capacities above "until the Seed should come," and then ceased to function in that capacity.
So did the fleshly ordinances function as a reminder of sins "until the Seed should come?" Yes. Circumcision and fleshly ordinances were required (for this purpose) only until the Seed should come.
Did the "spiritual law" (the Ten Commandments, etc.) function as a definer of sin only "until the Seed should come," and then cease to serve in this capacity? No. The "royal law" continued to function as the clear definer of sin even after the time of Christ. Today that law still clearly defines sin and makes transgressions as blatant as ever, as can be seen from Romans 7:13 and 1 John 3:4. It should be noted that Paul and John were not referring to the entire law in these verses. Sin is not the transgression of the temporary, ceremonial law. Notice the example of the law that continued to clearly define sin to Paul: "You shall not covet" (Romans 7:7). So in this verse, the law that made sin "exceedingly sinful" did not include circumcision and related laws. Therefore, this law did not include the entire law. Nor is this the context of Galatians 3:19.
Some think that the law ceased to clearly define sin because the law was "nailed to the cross." Yet when Christ came He did not make the transgression of law less defined. With His death, however, He did replace the substitute ceremonial laws that served as a reminder of sin. In Galatians 3:19, the context of "because" is causal-as the result of previous transgressions.
"Added" simply refers to one item being accompanied later by another item. Because something is added, this doesn’t necessarily mean that the law in question here was an afterthought.
After the first human transgression in the Bible, God told the serpent, "…He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel" (Genesis 3:15). This is a reference to the sacrificial bruise Christ would incur in His victory over Satan. The sacrifice of Jesus Christ was not an afterthought. On the contrary, it reflects the forethought of God, knowing that because of transgressions, mankind would need a Savior: "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Revelation 13:8).
Romans 4:15: "Because the law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression." Sin has existed since Adam. Therefore, a law of God has been in existence since Adam, regardless of whether or not it was codified. The laws pertaining to the two trees were not codified. Nevertheless, they were binding for Adam and Eve. God’s law is binding when it is clearly communicated, regardless of when or if it is codified.
So a temporary law was added "because" a permanent law was being transgressed. Some contend that Paul is saying in Galatians that what was transgressed (thus leading to the adding of the law) was God’s promise to Abraham. But that is not the case. It is not logical. It’s illogical to state that party B transgressed a promise made to him by party A. A person does not transgress another person’s promise. Promises were not being transgressed. Laws were being transgressed.
Each one of the principles outlined in the Ten Commandments was clearly communicated by God from the time of Adam and Eve. And mankind had transgressed those laws. It is true that circumcision and sacrifices also existed from early times (before Sinai). However, the Levitical administration of these laws was unique and far more elaborate than anything that had existed before. The Levitical laws were added alongside the pre-existing principles of the Ten Commandments.
Galatians 3:19: "What purpose then does the law serve?" The answer to this question is that this temporary law was added to serve as a "tutor to bring us to Christ" (verse 24). Paul repeated this answer in Hebrews 10:1, 3: "For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect…. But in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year." The Galatian controversy surrounded circumcision and its obligations, which included sacrifices among other things.
Part 3: "till the Seed should come"
The priesthood was a type of Christ, our High Priest. The sacrificial animals were a type of Christ, the Lamb of God. When Christ came, the types were no longer necessary. The Ten Commandments were not a type of Christ, therefore they were not part of the substitute tutor that was removed when the eternal Tutor arrived.
Hebrews 9:9-10 states, "It was symbolic for the present time in which both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make him who performed the service perfect in regard to the conscience- concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation." None of the Ten Commandments is a fleshly ordinance. The language of Galatians 3:19 melds perfectly into the language and thought of Hebrews 9:9-10.
Galatians 5:2: "Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing." The fleshly ordinance of circumcision resulted in the obligation to keep all the fleshly ordinances. The Jewish New Testament notes, "In other words, circumcision is part of an initiation rite which makes a Gentile part of the Jewish community. At that point he ceases to be a Gentile, becomes a Jew, and voluntarily obligates himself to do everything a Jew is expected to do" (David Stern, p. 561, Galatians 5:2-4, 1992, Clarksville, MD).
"Justification" is mentioned 38 times in the New Testament; 8 times in Galatians; 14 times in Romans. In the Old Testament, after one committed a sin, the fleshly ordinances allowed for him to be right with God again. The fleshly ordinances involved a type of justification process until the Seed should come. In the Old Testament the purification process was through fleshly ordinances until the Seed should come. Christ came so that we can be purified "by faith" (Acts 15:9). The Ten Commandments are not included in the justification or purification laws.
God temporarily imposed the system of Levitical priests, physical sacrifices and other tabernacle- and temple-centered carnal ordinances on a group of people whose males were circumcised-until the Son of God gave His divine life as a sacrifice for sin, and then was resurrected to be a spiritual High Priest to those who trusted in Him for grace and for mercy and for the strength to receive salvation on His terms, one of which is determination to obey the spiritual law of God.
Part 4: "appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator"
Moses was not the "mediator" of the Ten Commandments, which were spoken by God directly to the people. Consequently the unmediated Ten Commandments are not in question in Galatians 3:19. When Moses came down from Sinai with the two tablets of stone, it was 40 days and nights after God’s voice had spoken these commandments. Israel was expected to obey God’s voice. And the Sabbath command was given twice by God’s voice before the Ten Commandments were written in stone (Exodus 16; 20).
When the covenant was ratified (Exodus 24:1-8), sacrificial blood was sprinkled on the "Book of the Covenant" (verse 7) and the "people" (verse 8). At this point, the Ten Commandments had not yet been written by the finger of God (Exodus 24:12-18). It doesn’t seem logical that God would have Moses come up on the mountain to receive His own personal rewrite of something that Moses had already written in the "Book of the Covenant" (24:7). And even less logical that God would later have Moses come up yet a second time to receive His second personal rewrite of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 34:1-4), if they were already written in the "Book of the Covenant." There is simply no evidence that the words of the Ten Commandments were included in the "Book of the Covenant." The fact that God wrote only the Ten Commandments again, with His own finger, shows how distinct God considers these commandments to be.
The point of all this is that God views the Ten Commandments as something special. If there is scriptural evidence of anyone "compartmentalizing" the law, it is God Himself who did it. The Ten Commandments are the only words of law that He wrote with His own finger. They were given by the unmediated hand and voice of God; all else that God mandated at Sinai was given by God, but through Moses. All other laws that God has given are in some way reflective of the principles of love contained in this perfect "law of liberty" (James 2:12). They are the font from which all other godly laws flow.
Exodus 32:16: "Now the tablets were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God engraved on the tablets." And the codified version of the Ten Commandments in stone was written by "the finger of God," both times, not by the hand of the mediator, Moses (Exodus 24:12; 34:28).
Deuteronomy 4:13-14 states, "So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone. And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that you might observe them in the land which you cross over to possess." Notice that Moses said the "Ten Commandments" were commanded to "you" and the statutes to "me." Moses did not see himself as the mediator of the Ten Commandments. Did Moses compartmentalize the law?
The Ten Commandments, alone, are called "His covenant." The word covenant can be used in a broad sense or a narrow sense noting specific areas. So in a narrow sense, the Ten Commandments alone were a smaller covenant. The Sabbath was also a covenant that God gave Moses instructions about (Exodus 31:16).
Deuteronomy 5:22 states, "These words the Lord spoke to all your assembly, in the mountain from the midst of the fire, the cloud, and the thick darkness, with a loud voice; and He added no more. And He wrote them on two tablets of stone and gave them to me." Why didn’t He add any more? Was it simply because the people were afraid? If so, then was it a coincidence that He stopped after the Tenth Commandment? Surely they were afraid beginning with the First Commandment that thundered from God’s voice. A bigger question is: Why did God only write the Ten Commandments? Certainly the people were no longer afraid while Moses was on the mountain for 40 days. Why didn’t God say, "I’ll write all the commandments that I intended to speak to them but couldn’t get to because of their fear"? By both speaking and writing the Ten Commandments only, God distinguishes these commandments in a special way.
2 Chronicles 5:10: "Nothing was in the ark except the two tablets which Moses put there at Horeb, when the Lord made a covenant with the children of Israel, when they had come out of Egypt." Did the people’s fears at Sinai also dictate how many commandments would be put in the ark? Of course not. God clearly distinguished the Ten Commandments in a unique way. They were put in a different compartment or compartmentalized. And the other laws were laid alongside or "beside the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there as a witness against you" (Deuteronomy 31:26). Yet the uniqueness of these commands is decreased when they are viewed as just a part of the entire law. Without delving into a discussion of every law that is binding today, it’s quite obvious that the Ten Commandments were not part of the problem in Galatia.
The following scriptures describe some of the laws that Moses was the "mediator" of. Instructions for the tabernacle were given to Moses in Exodus 25-31. God commanded Moses, and then Moses instructed the religious leaders, who in turn instructed the people.
This is the law of the burnt offering, the grain offering, the sin offering, the trespass offering, the consecrations, and the sacrifice of the peace offering, which the Lord commanded Moses on Mount Sinai (Leviticus 7:37-38).
But Aaron and his sons offered sacrifices on the altar of burnt offering and on the altar of incense, for all the work of the Most Holy Place, and to make atonement for Israel, according to all that Moses the servant of God had commanded (1 Chronicles 6:49).
Then you will prosper, if you take care to fulfill the statutes and judgments with which the Lord charged Moses concerning Israel. Be strong and of good courage; do not fear nor be dismayed (1 Chronicles 22:13).
Then Solomon, and all the assembly with him, went to the high place that was at Gibeon; for the tabernacle of meeting with God was there, which Moses the servant of the Lord had made in the wilderness (2 Chronicles 1:3).
The Ten Commandments were not commanded by the hand of Moses. Therefore, he is not the "mediator" of these commandments. The phrase "by the hand of a mediator" appeals to "by the hand of Moses," which was used 20 times in the Old Testament. This phrase denotes laws God commanded first to Moses, most of which were later written by the hand of Moses. This should not be confused with the fact that Moses simply carried the Ten Commandments "in his hand" (Exodus 32:15).
Not every law given by the hand of Moses is abolished since the principles of the Ten Commandments were reiterated in some fashion in other laws. Obviously, these principles were not part of the controversy in the book of Galatians. However a common denominator between the laws in question in the book of Galatians is that Moses was the "mediator" of them. Circumcision was a prerequisite to many, if not most, of the laws commanded by the hand of Moses. Circumcision and related obligations were at the heart of the controversy in the book of Galatians. Notice how "by the hand of Moses" is commonly used to denote laws that Moses was a "mediator" of:
The children of Israel brought a freewill offering to the Lord, all the men and women whose hearts were willing to bring material for all kinds of work which the Lord, by the hand of Moses, had commanded to be done (Exodus 35:29).
So Aaron and his sons did all the things that the Lord had commanded by the hand of Moses (Leviticus 8:36).
And that you may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the Lord has spoken to them by the hand of Moses (Leviticus 10:11).
These are the statutes and judgments and laws which the Lord made between Himself and the children of Israel on Mount Sinai by the hand of Moses (Leviticus 26:46).
These were the ones who were numbered of the families of the Kohathites, all who might serve in the tabernacle of meeting, whom Moses and Aaron numbered according to the commandment of the Lord by the hand of Moses (Numbers 4:37).
At the command of the Lord they remained encamped, and at the command of the Lord they journeyed; they kept the charge of the Lord, at the command of the Lord by the hand of Moses (Numbers 9:23).
So they started out for the first time according to the command of the Lord by the hand of Moses (Numbers 10:13).
If you sin unintentionally, and do not observe all these commandments which the Lord has spoken to Moses-all that the Lord has commanded you by the hand of Moses, from the day the Lord gave commandment and onward throughout your generations (Numbers 15:22-23).
And he laid his hands on him and inaugurated him, just as the Lord commanded by the hand of Moses (Numbers 27:23).
These are the commandments and the judgments which the Lord commanded the children of Israel by the hand of Moses in the plains of Moab by the Jordan, across from Jericho (Numbers 36:13).
He even set a carved image, the idol which he had made, in the house of God… and I will not again remove the foot of Israel from the land which I have appointed for your fathers-only if they are careful to do all that I have commanded them, according to the whole law and the statutes and the ordinances by the hand of Moses (2 Chronicles 33:7-8).
So slaughter the Passover offerings, consecrate yourselves, and prepare them for your brethren, that they may do according to the word of the Lord by the hand of Moses (2 Chronicles 35:6).
You made known to them Your holy Sabbath, and commanded them precepts, statutes and laws, by the hand of Moses Your servant (Nehemiah 9:14). [God introduced them to the Sabbath in Exodus 16 and 20 and later commanded precepts by the hand of Moses.]
The Bible is not absolutely clear as to the meaning of "angels" in the context of Paul’s statement in Galatians 3:19. Some believe that it refers to spirit angels having a part to play in the giving of some of the ceremonial/temporary laws. Others believe that it refers to human agents or messengers (Levites and prophets) who were used in this same manner. Regardless of the identity of those referred to as "angels," the point is that the Bible makes a distinction between the unmediated laws which God gave directly (for example, the Ten Commandments) and the mediated laws given through "angels."
Summary
The Ten Commandments are the most succinct summary and the clearest starting point of a discussion concerning which laws are still fully binding on Christians under the terms of the New Covenant. The purpose of this paper is not to note every single law that is still binding on Christians today. These principles define how we are to love God and man and are expounded upon throughout the Old Testament. However, circumcision is the initiation rite for the fleshly ordinances, which repeatedly are said to be no longer required for Christians. Unlike the Ten Commandments, it was the fleshly ordinances that were "added because of transgression, till the Seed should come…and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator [Moses]."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.