Eternal Covenant of Truth

A Jew and a Christian were arguing about the ways of their religion. The Jewish man said, “You people have been taking things from us for thousands of years; the Ten Commandments, for instance.” The Christian replied, “Well, it’s true that we took the Ten Commandments from you, but you can’t actually say that we’ve kept them!”

Many Christians will chuckle at the above joke, realizing that it is humorous because there is some truth in it. And the point is very valid – if you line up a “New Covenant” Christian and a Jew and ask them the first text that comes to mind when you mention “God’s Law”, their answers will likely be worlds apart. The Jew will probably give you a text like this one; “The law from your mouth is more precious to me than thousands of pieces of silver and gold.”[1] The New Covenant Christian, on the other hand, will very likely quote the following text; “ “Anyone who tries to please God by obeying the Law is under a curse.”[2] Adventist Christians and to an extent Reform and Conservative Jews tend to ride the fence on this one – God’s Law gets separated into the “10 Commandments” and the “Jewish Ceremonial Law”, and the 10 Commandments portion is extolled and upheld.[3]

Where did Jesus fall on this spectrum? Historical records preserved through time indicate that he taught a reformed version of God’s Law, observing as Jeremiah did that the lying pen of the Jewish elders had handled Torah (the Law) falsely.[4] Jesus was never wishy-washy in his teachings:  “If you want to have eternal life, you must obey (God’s) commandments.” His counsel was simple, and completely consistent with the latter prophets. Rather than upholding the multiple and unending list of “commandments” extolled by the religious leadership, he upheld a simpler version of God’s law, God’s true law.

As a Jewish rabbi, Jesus kept the Sabbath and instructed everyone to do the same. What Jesus came against with regard to the Sabbath is the militant demands the priesthood made regarding how it should be kept. Jesus offered that, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.”[5] In other words, the Sabbath was intended to be a joyous event each week! It was never intended to be laden with all of the man-made rules and mitzvah (laws) that turned the Sabbath into an unbearable yoke of slavery—which is exactly what the Pharisees and Sadducees had done to this weekly day of rest, relaxation and joy.

Growing up Adventist, our family had our own unwritten version of the “Adventist Talmud” to follow on Sabbath. For example, we could play with other Adventist kids on Sabbath (“Bible tag”, etc.) but not with the non-Adventist kids next door. We could wade into the water at the beach if we were fully dressed (and it was sort of OK or at least forgivable if you accidentally fell in) but we couldn’t dress as if we were intentionally going swimming. We could go for a walk but not ride our bikes. There were even certain foods that really weren’t considered  appropriate Sabbath fare – hot dogs, pizza, burgers, and other such “fun” foods.

Despite these unwritten and sometimes nonsensical regulations, I realized deep in my heart that the Sabbath was special. Indeed, God has always affirmed via the prophets that His Sabbaths are important to Him and His people.

“I gave them my laws and teachings, so they would know how to live right. And I commanded them to respect the Sabbath as a way of showing that they were holy and belonged to me. ¹³ But the Israelites rebelled against me in the desert. They refused to obey my laws and teachings, and they treated the Sabbath like any other day. Then in my anger, I decided to destroy the Israelites in the desert once and for all.” [6]

“Her priests do violence to my law and profane my holy things; they do not distinguish between the holy and the common; they teach that there is no difference between the unclean and the clean; and they shut their eyes to the keeping of my Sabbaths, so that I am profaned among them.”[7]

While God said His people were to keep His Sabbaths holy, and while the Almighty One can be seen clearly chastising the elders and leaders for not keeping them, the debate among Christians of different denominations rages on. The New Covenant Christian will base his argument upon Paul’s counsel in Romans 14.

“One man considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind.”[8]

In Beau’s long ago Bapticostal past, he used this specific verse many times in his arguments with Adventists regarding the Sabbath. He would stress how Adventists were applying an unhealthy focus on Sabbath observance in direct contention to what Paul had said. He would gleefully crow that within these very same verses Paul was calling these compassionate vegetarian believers “weak” in their “faith”. After years of prayer and study and long after he had lost contact with the Adventist family he had so unmercifully heckled as a kid, he finally realized that the Sabbath was indeed a blessing and not a burden for the people of God.

The average Christian of any denomination is bound to have noticed that there are some very marked differences in what Jesus the Messiah taught about the true Law of God and what Paul of Tarsus counseled. Jesus said, Jesus said, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets” ”[9] while Paul demands that Jesus “gave his own body to destroy the Law of Moses with all its rules and commands.”[10] Jesus’ answer to the question of how one was to enter into eternal life was quite simple.

And, behold, one came and said unto him, “Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?”

And he [Jesus] unto him, “Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.”[11]

Paul’s answer was markedly different than that of Jesus. Rather than elevating God’s true law, Paul offered that the Law of God is moot for salvation.

“I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!”[12]

Does Paul consider the fact that Jesus led a remarkable life, teaching a reforming message of love and a gospel of good news? No! He merely looks at Jesus’ value in light of his death. Rather than asking, “What did Jesus do?” or “What did Jesus teach us about our Father?” Paul’s question was, “How did Jesus die and what meaning can we find in it?”

I studied these passages at length and found the discrepancies troubling. How should I reconcile these two contradictory viewpoints? Clearly, I would need to pick and choose one passage and sort of disregard the other as much as possible. It was not an ideal solution, but it seemed to be the only possible way to deal with the fact that Jesus and Paul were not in agreement with each other.