The Law or the Lord It seems to me quite amazing that anyone could believe that the Mosaic Law was a fuller more complete or better representation of the moral character of God than the actual sending of the Son of God Himself into our world. Does not John say in ch 1 of his gospel:- No-one has, at any time, seen God (not even Moses - my parenthesis). But the Son, who is Himself God, at the right hand of the Father, He has made Him known The moral character of God must include His great grace and truth. And it is John, in the same prologue, who tells us that these attributes were not explicit in the giving of the Law, but are focal in the coming of the Son. So this Law was a lesser revelation of what God is like, and in every way is inferior to that which we see in the very image of the invisible God. And thus we see, yet again, a demonstration of the revealed contrast between the covenants. Old covenant is shadow; new covenant is the realities of which the shadows are insubstantial, blurred shapes. in fact, I would go further. I cant think of anywhere in Scripture where it is stated that a purpose of the Law was to reveal to us what God is like. I stand to be corrected - feel free to let me know if I am incorrect. This is something we often hear said. But is it just one more Law use we have swallowed, and even perpetuate, without actually checking it out in Scripture itself? Of course, indirectly, everything God does and everything He says tells us something about who He is. But His purpose in the giving of the Law is not mainly self-disclosure. Rather, it is government, isnt it? True, there is revelation about Him within it - for example, He says I, the Lord am a jealous God. But this is not the Laws raison detre. The incarnation, however; the coming into our world of the Son has this purpose at its heart - to make Him known. As never before, and never again, Jesus reveals the Father. See Jesus, and you see the Father. Come to Him, you are coming to the Father. And so on. Explicit, explained, exposed. So it appears to me - no pun intended - that to compare the Law and the Lord of glory in this way is completely inconsistent and illogical. That just wasnt what the Law was for. The Law was to do with the lifestyle of Gods old covenant people, Israel as they lived in the land of promise, under His direction. The Son has to do with the spirituality of Gods new covenant people, the church. These two are not contingent. *Thanks to Jacobo Alvarez for originating this thought-line
Posted on: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 08:46:20 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015