What is the preterist view of the Torah? (Law)

[Guest]

I've been trying to answer questions as they come up rather than writing a treatise, but basically I believe that while the Law technically still exists, we as Christians have a special relationship to it right now that doesn't include certain aspects of it.

The Law was meant to point us to Christ, right? Well, my position revolves around exactly how the Law does that. To use an analogy, the Law is like a force that pushes one towards a goal - the goal being Christ.

The Israelites who had left Egypt were very rebellious towards God. Therefore, they needed a very strict, disciplinarian approach. Certain aspects of the Law - called the "restrictive Law" - catered to their need. Faithful Israelites like Moses, Joshua and Caleb, on the other hand, didn't need that same disciplinarian approach. Other aspects of the Law - called the "expansive" or "unrestricted Law" - catered to their need. Wherever the Israelites were on the spectrum of "having Christ formed in them," to use NT terminology, the Law could benefit them and continue to push them towards that goal.

The Christian economy consists of the "expansive" or "unrestricted" portion of the Mosaic Law which can basically be summed up by "love your neighbor as yourself." This is also known as the Royal Law. God has basically removed the disciplinarian and ceremonial aspects of the Mosaic Law because we as Christians are supposed to be mature in Christ.

The difficulty is that many Christians are still babes in Christ! They even die and enter God's presence that way! So when Christ comes, we read that He "rules with an iron rod." In other words, He's strict when it's appropriate but also merciful when it's appropriate.

The goal has been and always will be the same. God just uses different methods at different times to get the result He wants.

I hope that makes sense.

Damon

[Guest]

Damon

If I understand you, a babe in Christ would be under the Law of Moses as the Jews were before Christ?

It seems to me the purpose of the Law was to bring us to the understanding of our need for a Savior - to atone for our sins and give us the power to live as He would have us live. It did not bring Paul to the place where he lived the expansive law, as you put it, but "I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death" Rom. 7:10. As I understand Paul (Romans 8:1-17) the law is powerless to bring us to the place where we can live as God would have us live, only through the spirit can this be done, an advantage the Jews did not have.

God bless, Homer

[Guest]

Damon

If I understand you, a babe in Christ would be under the Law of Moses as the Jews were before Christ?

Not exactly. I believe history to be a series of beginnings and ends, and I believe the Mosaic Law as a whole to have ended, never to be reinstituted. Observe the following:

In the beginning, man dwelt in the presence of God, in the Garden of Eden, but was cast out because of sin. In the end, all of mankind will once again dwell in the presence of God, in a "new heavens and new earth" that has become a garden paradise like Eden.

At the 3000 year mark of human history - the very apex of history, if you will - the Temple was built to represent mankind dwelling in the presence of God. But it was destroyed - twice - because mankind once again sinned and was cast out of His presence. When Christ returns, we'll once again have a rebuilt Temple and dwell in God's presence.

When Israel came out of Egypt, they were given the Mosaic Law, although patriarchs like Abraham had lived by faith. When Christ came, we were once again enjoined to live by faith.

So, here's the timeline:

Year 0: Man in Eden
Year ~2500: Israel leaves Egypt, given Mosaic Law
Year 3000: Temple built
Year ~3500: Temple destroyed
Year ~3600: Temple rebuilt
Year ~4000: Christ's ministry, Mosaic Law ends
Year ~4000: Temple destroyed
Year ~6000: Temple rebuilt, Christ returns
Year ~7000: No more Temple, man returns to Eden

My point is that history is a series of progressions and reversals. As I said above, we see a distinct beginning and ending of things. The Mosaic Law, as such, will therefore not be reinstituted, but Jesus will still "rule with an iron rod" when He returns because the Mosaic Law didn't achieve what it was meant to achieve, which is maturity. (By the way, part of the reason why we see a prophecy in Malachi 4:4 to "remember the Law of Moses" is for maturity's sake. We need to look back to it to learn what we haven't yet learned.)

It seems to me the purpose of the Law was to bring us to the understanding of our need for a Savior - to atone for our sins and give us the power to live as He would have us live. It did not bring Paul to the place where he lived the expansive law, as you put it, but "I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death" Rom. 7:10. As I understand Paul (Romans 8:1-17) the law is powerless to bring us to the place where we can live as God would have us live, only through the spirit can this be done, an advantage the Jews did not have.

The problem is that according to the chiasmus in Deuteronomy 6:1-9 (see this post), this is exactly the purpose of the Law: to bring us to Christ. That's also what Galatians says.

Paul said that the Law brought death instead of life because it could lead and direct a person to do what's right as well as punish them if they did what's wrong, but it couldn't, in and of itself, give people the desire from the heart to do what's right! That's what the Holy Spirit does. As Paul said, it's not that the Law was flawed. We were.

Damon