Christianity by dint of its very name involves a relationship with
Jesus Christ. Some of the first-century followers of Jesus believed him to
be the prophesied Messiah of the Old Testament. The term itself means
"anointed" and the word "Christ" is derived from the Greek word with the
same meaning. The New Testament scriptures go way beyond an attempt to
convince its readers that Jesus was the Messiah who will return. The New
Testament claims that Jesus was of divine origin and came in the first
century to atone for all human sin, past, present, and future.
In the New Testament, Jesus Christ is presented as the Son of God
and as the Savior of all humankind. Scholars may debate concerning whether
all of the twenty seven canonical books of the New Testament are written
from that perspective, but it is the dominant belief in the collection
when considered as a whole. Mainstream Christianity has historically
taught that Jesus died to save human beings from the penalty that all have
earned by sinning. This belief is a critical element in the theology of
the Commandment Keepers.
This dissertation is discussing a Christian movement, and,
indeed, the role of Jesus Christ in the teachings of most
Commandment-keeping sects can hardly be overstated. His function in
salvation history involves a First and Second Coming to earth. The Second
has not yet occurred:
When Jesus Christ came preaching the gospel of the Kingdom of God, He
built on the foundation already planned by God the Father from the
beginning and revealed by the earlier prophets. As the messenger of the
Kingdom, He revealed vital truths that were not understood from the Old
Testament prophecies.
One of the great misunderstandings about the Kingdom, not
made clear until revealed by Jesus Christ, was that thousands of years
would separate His first coming as the sacrificial Lamb of God (John
1:29) from His return as the conquering King of Kingdom (Revelation
19:11- 16). His first coming fulfilled a vital part of the gospel of the
Kingdom'His sacrifice to make possible our forgiveness, justification
and ultimate entry into the Kingdom. His second coming will bring the
establishment of that incredible Kingdom. (Treybig 1999. Gospel of
the Kingdom, 12)
As has already been shown, for Commandment Keepers, the Jesus
Christ of the New Testament scriptures is not only the Savior of humanity,
but also a role model, the ideal for which to strive. His sinlessness
according to the divine law defined perfect character. His criticisms of
the religious authorities of his time permit Commandment Keepers to look
to New Testament precedents rather than to Talmudic interpretations when
applying Old Testament instructions.
In keeping with New Testament instructions explicit or implicit,
Jewish authority is acknowledged by Commandment Keepers in determining the
Old Testament canon. The standard Jewish calendar is also generally
accepted. Some dissenting factions have attempted to use some alternate
system of regulating the calendar, often of their own devising. These
groups are not the focus of this dissertation. Of course, a calendar is
necessary for the observance of the annual holy days commanded in the
Torah. Jesus observed those days.
Although the rabbinical calendar regulations are accepted, from
their reading of the New Testament Commandment Keepers understand that
Jesus did not accept rabbinical authority in every area. He rejected some
Pharisaic traditions. He criticized some Pharisaic legislation as too
onerous or as actually contrary to the original intent of the Torah.
Commandment Keepers believe that they are following his lead by not
requiring their beliefs and practices to be in complete harmony with
Rabbinic Judaism.
It has already been shown that Commandment Keepers believe they
are following the example of Jesus by being non-violent and politically
marginal.
At his First Coming, appearing on earth as a human Jesus, Christ
came, not to seize the throne, but to conquer Satan, qualify to replace
him on the throne, and to ransom the kidnapped world with his shed
blood.
Now, why the Church? Christ came also to call out selected
and chosen ones from Satan's world to turn from Satan's way into the way
of God's law and to qualify to reign with Christ when he comes to
replace Satan on the throne of the earth. Those called into the Church
were called not merely for salvation and eternal life, but to learn the
way of God's government and develop the divine character during this
mortal life in the Church age. (Armstrong 1985, 201)
The sectarian churches of God would generally agree that some
portions of the written code contained in the Old Testament remain
obligatory for New Testament Christians:
Though the Ten Commandments are sometimes called the old covenant, we
should not assume that all the old covenant perished when the new was
established. The ordinance of marriage did not perish. Faith and love
did not perish. And neither did the righteous standards intended for all
humanity from the beginning. God did not change His morals! (Marrs 1998,
6)
As has already been shown, respect for divine law is a
critically important factor in the heritage of the fellowships whose
beliefs and practices have been discussed in this dissertation. Shortly
before his death, Herbert W. Armstrong wrote:
God's law is spiritual and can be summed up in one simple but
all-inclusive word'love. His law for the guidance of human conduct is
subdivided into the two great commandments, love toward God and love
toward neighbor. These, in turn, are subdivided into the 10
Commandments. Jesus magnified this law by showing how its principle
expands to cover virtually every human infraction. The third chapter of
II Corinthians shows that God's law is to be applied in principle. It is
summed up in one single word, love. Nevertheless, it is so perfect that,
by applying its principle, it is a complete law. There is only one
perfect lawmaker, and that is God. (Armstrong 1985, 49-50).
His statement then concluded with the following paragraph:
Bear in mind the government of God is based on the law of God, which
is the way of life of outflowing love, cooperation, concern for the good
of the governed. And this law of God produces peace, happiness,
cooperation through obedience. (Armstrong 1985, 50) [The words in all
caps were written that way in the original quotation. Herbert W.
Armstrong frequently used this technique in his books and articles, and
that style has influenced many other writers who have read his works.]
A critically important key to what in the written code no
longer applies under the New Covenant is in the role of Jesus Christ in
the divine plan of salvation. Regarding the crucifixion of Jesus,
Armstrong wrote that:
Because at that moment he had taken on himself our sins, in order to
pay the penalty in our stead, he was forsaken by even his Father, God.
As he hung on the cross, helpless, a soldier stabbed him with a spear,
he screamed in pain (Matt. 27:50, Moffatt) and then died. He did this
because you and I have transgressed the law of God. He paid the supreme
possible sacrifice for you and for me. (1985, 212-213)
Since he paid the penalty for sin for every human being, the specific
penalties are not obligatory. The portion of the Torah that involves
external discipline so as to cause or compel observance is replaced by the
internal power of God's Holy Spirit in the believer, or that divine
influence permeating the community. Let us notice again the prophecy of
Jeremiah:
But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel
after those days, says the LORD: 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. (Jeremiah 31:33)
Related to the freedom from the required penalties is the end
of any obligation related to the sacrificial system. It is not prohibited.
Moreover, if done at all, it would have to be done as biblically
prescribed. Not having to be concerned about it makes a large portion of
the original Pentateuch of spiritual value, perhaps immense spiritual
value, but not prescriptive for Christian living.
While still in its sectarian position, the Worldwide Church of
God explained the Levitical sacrifices in the following manner:
Israel's sacrifices were to serve as a reminder of sin (Hebrews
10:3). An animal's life was taken to picture that without the shedding
of blood there is no forgiveness (Hebrews 9:22). But the Levitical
sacrificial system lasted only until Jesus' death paid the penalty of
sin for all people everywhere. (Shoaf 1993, 45)
A further comment on Leviticus would also be useful to cite:
God can fully restore Christians today because Christ completely
fulfilled the sacrificial system. Only in him do we experience the
awesome opportunity to come humbly, yet boldly, before the holy throne
of God, the throne of grace (Hebrews 4:16). (Shoaf 1993, 45)
The observance of days of rest and commemoration are factors
in the life of almost any community. For the Commandment Keeper, biblical
Judaism provides the cycle of observance. A distinction is made between
what was explicitly commanded in the law and the annual observance of
Purim and Hanukkah that the Jewish community accepted upon itself. These
days are considered more specifically Jewish and no official Church
observance occurs. Presumably a congregation whose members were largely of
Jewish descent might conduct some official observance.
Even contemporary Orthodox Judaism does not conduct the
sacrificial rites. According to mainstream Jewish opinion, the place
biblically designated as the only proper location for the Old Testament
sacrifices is currently under Muslim control. Moreover, the dominant view
in orthodoxy is that the next Holy Temple will accompany the coming of the
Messiah. The prevailing view is that sacrifices need not begin before the
Messianic Age.
Mainstream Christian teaching often focuses on the importance of
Jesus' willingness to suffer and die to save human beings from ultimate
punishment for their sins. If human sin led to such a cataclysm as the
suffering and death of Christ, the importance of obedience to the law
ought to be obvious:
Christ magnified the Old Testament law by revealing its spiritual
intent and purpose. The Christian is not justified by the law, but by
grace through faith in Jesus Christ. Whereas the Christian sins by
breaking the spirit or letter of God's law, he or she is not to persist
in a state of sin, but must strive to exemplify the mind of God in every
facet of life (Matthew 5:17- 19; Romans 7:7; 13:10; Ephesians 2:8-10; 1
John 3:9; 5:3). (Shoaf 1993, 51, 36)
In writing about conversion to Christianity, Armstrong wrote:
So a Christian convert, then, is one who has received God's Spirit,
which is dwelling in him, leading him, and he is following god's way of
life. A converted Christian has forsaken his former habitual way of
life'his selfish way unconcerned with God. Now he lives in the habitual
way of God's Word'in the light of the Word of God. (Armstrong 1972, 14)
Regarding the problem of sinning by committed Christians,
Armstrong wrote:
A Christian may, from force of habit, or under weakness and
temptation, sin. But if he is a Christian, he is immediately repentant,
and on this repentance Christ's sacrifice cleanses his sin (I John
1:7-9). (Armstrong 1972, 21)
However, much of the Torah involved a sacrificial system that
is seen by Commandment Keepers as foreshadowing the ministry of Jesus
Christ and thus consigned to redundancy after his crucifixion. Since that
system is no longer required, commandments depending upon it also have
become unnecessary. Some of the laws seem to be related to public health
and Commandment Keepers see in them principles, such as quarantining, that
have practical value. The specific details are not viewed as contemporary
requirements.
Laws of ritual purity are seen in the hermeneutic of Commandment
Keepers to be directly connected with Temple worship. Thus, they are
believed to be no longer a biblical requirement after the self-sacrifice
performed by Jesus Christ. The idea that the laws of ritual purity are
totally dependent upon the sacrificial system is an interpretation that
does not have to be accepted as a fact. Yet, it is intellectually unfair
to characterize this interpretation as arbitrarily picking and choosing
which laws currently apply.
The reader should keep in mind that the Commandment-keeping
movement does not deny that the New Covenant has effected a change in
approach. At issue is the nature of the change and where the line is to be
drawn concerning covenantal requirements. While stating this, the author
concedes that the movement is vulnerable to criticism for not requiring
enough.
Under the Old Covenant, circumcision was required for men to
fully participate in the sacrificial system, and thus assume their proper
spiritual role. The New Covenant replaces this requirement with a divinely
inspired change of heart.
For a person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true
circumcision something external and physical. Rather, a person is a Jew
who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart'it
is spiritual and not literal. Such a person receives praise not from
others but from God. (Romans 2:28-29)
If the scriptures concerning the relationship of the ministry
of Jesus Christ to the sacrificial system are taken seriously, it is
defensible to view that system and its regulations as non-binding on
Christians. Of course, should the Jews seek to restore the system, the law
would require that it be done according to all of the details or the
system would be invalid. The Christian way of life is seen to be fully
functional without the operation of the sacrificial system: "The temple
sacrifices and rituals were only temporary institutions until the
sacrifice of the real 'Lamb of God' (John 1:29)" (Foster 1999, Church,
43).
In ancient Jerusalem, sacrifices were offered daily. Additional
sacrifices and rituals took place during the weekly Sabbath and annual
festivals. Over history, religious Jews have been scattered around the
world, far from their Holy Temple in Jerusalem. Even when it stood, many,
if not most Jews, were rarely able to actually participate in or even view
the sacrificial rites. Yet, throughout those years and since, Jews have
faithfully observed the weekly and annual days of rest. Their observance
does not depend upon the practice of animal sacrifices or related temple
rituals.
While Orthodox Jews pray thrice daily for a restored sacrificial
system, Commandment-keeping Christians do not have the same concerns.
Since they do believe in a close reading and literalist interpretation of
biblical prophecy, they do expect that when Christ returns, the Holy
Temple will be rebuilt. They do believe that sacrifices will be offered in
that Temple as a pedagogical tool to teach the significance of the
sacrifice of Jesus Christ. This belief is derived from a literal
interpretation of the many Old Testament prophecies concerning sacrifices
during the Messianic age. Examples can be found in Ezekiel 44 and
Zechariah 14. That prospect is not viewed as necessitating a restoration
of the entire system as recorded in the Pentateuch. Belief that sacrifices
will exist in some restricted form in the millennial kingdom does not
require Commandment Keepers to perpetuate practices that are directly
related to the ancient Israelite offerings and animal sacrifices.
The lengthy passage that follows is worth citing in the context
of this chapter. It summarizes the hermeneutic of the sectarian churches
of God for interpreting from the biblical text that Old Testament
commandments are applicable for contemporary Christians:
Because of transgressions'that is, because the spiritual law was
being broken'God added, 430 years after the covenant with Abraham (Gen.
17:1-8), through Moses, a civil code of law and a physical law of
rituals and ceremonies (Gal. 3:16-19). That law was a physical law,
including animal sacrifices. It was a substitute for Christ's sacrifice
and the Holy Spirit, which was not given to Old Testament Israelites.
The Holy Spirit gives us, now, power to obey. The rituals and sacrifices
consisted of physical labor'things to do morning, noon, and night'to
instill in them the habit of obedience. Why? Because they had been
disobeying. The civil code explained what sin is and the physical
rituals were to teach them the habit of obedience if they sinned.
Therefore they were a "schoolmaster," having authority until Christ came
to expound the spiritual intent of the letter of the law code and to pay
for sin by offering Himself as the Lamb of God (Gal. 3:24). (Armstrong
1989, 82-83)
The argument continues:
When the reality came (Christ'and the gift of the Holy Spirit), the
substitute ended. (83)
The paragraphs just cited could be the basis for a discussion
with fundamentalist evangelicals concerning how much of the corpus of the
Old Testament is in actuality a non-required "substitute" for the
ministry, sacrifice and continuing role of Jesus Christ. This dissertation
is intended as an aid in facilitating such a discussion.
As the reader can infer from the introductory chapter, this
dissertation has not been written in the style of an impassioned plea for
the acceptance of Commandment-keeping, sectarian Christianity. Indeed, the
attitude that adherents generally have towards society becomes a
self-fulfilling prophecy consigning Commandment Keepers to minority
status.
