How Does Jesus Fulfill the Law? (TGC Classic)

The following is an uncorrected transcript generated by a transcription service. Before quoting in print, please check the corresponding audio for accuracy. 

Don Carson
Now I’ve been teaching courses on how the New Testament quotes the old and how Jesus fulfills the Old Testament for about 45 years, which means, if you prick me with a pin or the like, I bleed Old Testament and New Testament. The danger, of course, is that I try to dump the whole lot on you in 45 minutes and produce nothing but a kind of spiritual indigestion, which is not helpful to anybody. So what I propose to do is to begin with four passages that we’ll look at just briefly, where there’s some kind of talk about fulfilling or not fulfilling, or following or not following the law, and then having stimulated your pure minds by way of remembrance, to quote Paul of Peter’s words, I’ll try to lay out a schema of different ways in which the New Testament is said to fulfill the law. Okay? And then I’ll end with two or three theological observations at the end. So that’s where we’re going. I begin then with several passages. The first one is in Matthew chapter five, near the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount, verses 17 to 20. Matthew 517, to 20. Here, Jesus says, Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. And then he says more in the following verses. Now it’s important to see what the text does not say. It does not say, I have not come to abolish the law and the prophets, but to keep them. There’s a perfectly good way in Greek for saying that, but that’s not what he says. He does not say, I have not come to abolish them, but to show their true intensity. It doesn’t say that either. It says, I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them, which immediately raises the question as to what fulfill means. Now, the verb to fulfill in the Greek New Testament is used more by Matthew than in the rest of the New Testament combined. And as far as I can see, everywhere in Matthew with there might be one exception. It means something like to be that to which the other party pointed. In other words, if Jesus fulfills x, it’s because x pointed to Jesus. And now, along this temporal axis, this axis of time, in the fullness of time, Jesus serves as that to which x pointed. Now, there are a couple of other ways in which the verb to fulfill is used in the New Testament, one in James and elsewhere that we need to go into. But as far as I can see, that’s the way Matthew regularly uses the text. So in other words, Jesus is not merely keeping the law or intensifying the law, which are a temporal abstract categories. He is fulfilling the law which presupposes progress and time. This pointed to something, and now in the fullness of time, something fulfills it. Now in one sense that’s easy enough to understand. We’ll see in a few minutes that there are ways in which, for example, the Passover celebration points to Jesus. I’ll come to that one explicitly in a few moments, how that works. But when Paul says, In First Corinthians five, Christ, our Passover has been sacrificed for us, what he means, of course, when Paul says that is that is that this is the fulfillment of the Passover. This is the direction in which the Passover sacrifice points. Exactly how that happens. We’ll come to, as I say, in a few moments. So, so when it comes to what we call the ceremonial law, it’s not uncommon for us to show ways in which Old Testament law is fulfilled in the coming of Jesus, or in Jesus’ teaching, or in Jesus sacrifice and death and resurrection. We’ll come to examples of that in due course. Now this isn’t the only passage in Matthew where something like this is said in Matthew, chapter 11, verse 13, I wish I had time to unpack the context more completely. But in Matthew, chapter 11, verse 13, Jesus says all the prophets and the law prophesied until John, that is John the Baptist. It,

Don Carson
and if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come. In other words, it doesn’t say the prophets prophesied and the law legislated. It says the prophets and the law prophesied. In other words, law can have a function in the mind of Jesus, not only of legislating, but of prophesying, of predicting and of course, again, the easy example is something like Passover. Passover was legislation. The event itself took place, and then there was legislation about how to observe the Passover, year by year, year by year, and was legislated. But Paul’s insistence is that that Passover celebration, year by year, ultimately pointed to Jesus as the ultimate Passover. Now we’ll see how that works, as I’ve said in a moment, but we’re we’ve got to come to grips with the fact that it’s not just prophecy that predicts, law can predict as well, and there are a lot of examples of that sort of thing, as we’ll see. Now, come back to chapter five, verse 17, still there. Do not think that I have come to abolish the law of the prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. Now, what is it then, when Jesus says the law of the prophets that he’s thinking of here? It’s worth mentioning an interpretation that is very common in the history of the church. In the history of the church, from about Aquinas on, it’s common to divide that’s 12th century. It’s common to divide the law into three parts, moral, civil and ceremonial law. Moral Law is usually defined as law that is binding on all human beings everywhere, in every age at all times. It’s moral law. It’s unchanging. Civil Law is normally defined as law given by God to the Israelites in the Old Testament, in virtue of the fact that they constituted a nation. It was civil law. So because the church is not a nation, but a covenant community, without being a nation, it’s an international community. There is no civil law. So the argument goes, but ceremonial law, then, is the law that is bound up with the temple, priesthood, sacrifice and so on, and that’s all fulfilled in Christ. That’s the common division of the law since Thomas Aquinas picked up by Calvin the reformers, most evangelicals and so on, moral civil ceremonial law. So the question is, what law is in view here? And many, many, many people have argued that what’s in view here is the moral law. So John Stott, for example, and his lovely exposition of the sermon on the mount called Christian counter culture. It’s worth picking up and reading. But in all fairness, on that particular point, I hesitate to say that I disagree with someone as venerable as John Stott, but I do. Now this may just mean that I’m wrong, but on the other hand, I insist on my right to be wrong. For you see, I have difficulty on that interpretation with the next verse. For truly, I tell you, Jesus says, until heaven and earth disappear. That’s the first until, until heaven and earth disappear. Not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen will, by any means disappear from the law until there’s the second, until everything is accomplished. Now, not the smallest letter in Hebrew, there’s a little letter. It’s called the yoth that is just a little hook. And not the least stroke of a pen in King James Version, the least tittle. What it refers to is, in Hebrew, there are three pairs of letters where there’s just a little blob of ink that distinguishes them. An R from a D, for example, is distinguished by one little blob of ink. It’s just a tittle. It’s just a drop. And this text is saying not one stroke of a pen, not one tittle will, in any sense, be removed from the law, taken away until. And then there are two untils. The first until at the beginning of the verse is until heaven and earth disappear. That means until the end of the age. That’s the ultimate until, until the end of the age. This stuff’s there. It’s in Scripture, and God’s not taking it away. And then the second until is until everything is accomplished, which again carries on the vision of chapter five, verse 17, the law is going to be fulfilled, and eventually it will all be accomplished. That is the law itself. Looks forward to everything being accomplished, everything that looks forward to all the way to the end of the age, various things coming along and are being fulfilled. The death of Christ, predicted in one fashion or another through the law, the resurrection of Christ, the exaltation of Christ, of the right hand, of the Son of God, the resurrection, existence of the promise of the new. Even in the New Earth in some way or other. It’s all predicted in the law in one fashion or another,

Don Carson
and every jot and tittle will have to be fulfilled all the way to the end of the age, until bit by bit, everything is accomplished. I think that’s what verse 18 says, and that sounds a lot more comprehensive than just the moral law. Now, if I had time, I’d go further and unpack verses 19 and 20, but I’m going to skip for want of time. Now, let’s turn to another passage, Romans, chapter 10. Romans, chapter 10, a well known, often cited text bearing on this subject. Let me start at verse one, brothers and sisters, my heart’s desire and prayer for to God. For the Israelites is that they may be saved for I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness of God and sought to establish their own they did not submit to Christ’s to God’s righteousness. Verse four, Christ is the culmination of the law, so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes now, our English versions have Christ is the culmination of the law. Christ is the fulfillment of the law. Christ is the end of the law. A lot of different words are used. The word in Greek, for those of you interested in such things, is telos, which can mean end. Hence the King James Version says Christ is the end of the law. But that might conjure up in English the idea of bringing it to an end, the law continues, continues, continues. Along comes Jesus. Bang Out goes the law. But the word end Telos can also have the notion, depending on the context of the goal of the law. So the law points ahead, points ahead, points ahead, points ahead. And then when Christ comes, that’s the goal, the end, the culmination, which is what the NIV here has, the culmination of the law. Now that might bring the law to an end, a stop, in some sense, but its valid continuity is precisely in that to which it points. Do you see and I take it? That’s the way this is meant. I won’t try and defend it. There are countless hundreds of books and articles written on this one verse alone in its context to argue one side or the other. I’ll just tell you for the moment which side is correct. My side, as far as I can see in the context, it does mean really, Christ is the culmination of the law. He’s the end. He’s the goal of the law. Which brings us back to this notion of the fulfillment of things. Do you see? Let’s pick up one more passage in Romans, and then one in First Corinthians, and then we’ll do more of our survey Romans, three Romans. 321, now let me remind you of the context from 118 to 320. Paul spends his time proving that all human beings, without distinction, without exception, are guilty sinners before God. And after working this out in terms of history and theology and Old Testament quotations and creation and fall and sexual matters and Jew and Gentile and so on, after he works it all out, he ends with an amazing list of Old Testament proof texts. Chapter three, verses 10 and following, as it is written, There is no one righteous, not even one. There is no one who understands. There is no one who seeks God. All have turned away. They have together become worthless. There is no one who does good, not even one. Their throats are open graves. Their tongues practice deceit. The poison of vipers is on their lips. Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood, ruin and misery mark their ways and the way of peace they do not know there is no fear of God before their eyes. That’s the background for the paragraph that begins in 321, but now and then, you have, in 321, to 26 one of the greatest atonement passages, cross passages, in all of the New Testament. Martin Luther calls this the center of the epistle to the Romans, and indeed, of the entire Bible.

Don Carson
Now it’s just verse 21 we’ll look at, I wish I had more time to go through the whole paragraph, but in verse 21 Paul says this, but now that is at this point in redemptive history. So you’re looking again at this sweep of history. Everybody guilty, whether they have been under the law or not, they’re all under the curse of the law, whether it’s the law written in their hearts or the. Law of Moses that they’ve inherited as Jews. It doesn’t matter. They’re all lost. But now, apart from the law, Oh, that’s interesting. Apart from the law, the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the law and the prophets testify. Now that’s interesting, too. You have both continuity and discontinuity. As far as I can see, it means something like this. But now, apart from the law covenant, apart from the structure of the law, that is the law covenant, which was given at the time of Moses in connection with the 10 Commandments and with what we’ve been hearing about in the Deuteronomy series, apart from that because that law covenant has come to an end. Apart from that law covenant the righteousness of God that we need to save us, that makes us acceptable before God, the righteousness of God that he talks about in the rest of the verse, the righteousness of God that’s secured in Christ and His cross work and His sacrifice for sin on our behalf. That’s the point of verses 21 to 26 apart from the law covenant. This has been made known to us, to which the law and the prophets testify. So it may be that this righteousness from God that is brought about by the cross of Christ comes to us now, has been revealed to us now, apart from the law covenant. But that doesn’t mean it’s got no connection whatsoever with the law of covenant. There is a sense in which the law covenant points forward to it. It’s to which the law and the prophets have, in fact, been pointing. Do you see that’s a little more subtle? It’s not the law is gone. Here comes the gospel, nor is it the law continues exactly the same way. Just suck it up. It’s, you know, this same law, the Old Covenant, the new No, no, the law covenants gone. It’s, it’s the righteousness of God has been disclosed apart from that law covenant. Yet it’s not gone, disappeared. Got nothing to do with anything. You can forget it and just study the New Testament. And consign the old testament to the pit. No, we’re told that the law covenant is that which pointed to Jesus. So if you want to understand who Jesus is and what he’s done, you need to understand that which points to him. Do you see? Let me read the verse again, but now, apart from the law, the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the law and the prophets testify. One more passage that talks about these things in interesting ways. First, Corinthians, chapter nine. Now, again, it would be helpful if we had time to unpack the entire context. We don’t have time. We’ll look briefly at verses, 19 to 23 First Corinthians, 919, to 23 though I am free and belong to no one, I’m in no one’s pocket. I’m in no one’s party. I have made myself a slave to everyone to win as many as possible. Now this is in a context where Paul is showing how he has given up so many of his rights precisely in order to win others. To Christ, he’s made himself a slave to others so that he can win them. And then he gives him a couple of examples to the Jews. This is Paul the Jew, the Christian Jew, writing to the Jews, I became like a I became like a Jew to win the Jews. What does he mean? He became like a Jew. He explains it. You know, I thought he was already a Jew, but he says he became like a Jew to win the Jews. He explains it to those under the law. There’s the law again. That is Jews who are under the law, to those under the law, I became like one under the law, although I myself am not under the law. Now that’s interesting, isn’t it,

Don Carson
and we’ll see in a few moments that he has to become like a Gentile too. So in other words, Paul does not see himself as a Christian Jew with Christian Jew sensibilities, who has to flex in order to win Gentiles. He sees himself rather in what the Latin theologians always call the teltium quid. Boy. That’ll impress your Bible study, won’t it? The teltium quid the third position, he’s not a Jew Christian, he’s not a Gentile Christian, he’s a Christian, and as a Christian, to win the Jews, he’s got to flex to become more Jewish in order to win the Jews, and he’s got to flex the other way to become more like those without the law to win those who are without the law now, with that background, remembering that he places himself in this tertium quid, in this third position, look again at the paragraph, verse 20, to the Jews. I became like a Jew to win the Jews, to those under the law, I became like. Like one under the law, though I myself am not under the law. So as to win those under the law, he has to like so in other words, he does not see himself as under the law covenant. He just doesn’t. So he’s prepared to eat kosher food when he’s with a lot of people who eat kosher food, so that he can win those who eat kosher food, as it were. But it’s not because he feels he himself must eat kosher food. Yet, clearly, in some sense, as we’ll see, this does not mean he is completely lawless. What does he go on to say to those not having the law that is Gentiles, to those not having the law, I became like one not having the law, though I am not free from God’s law. Whoa, Paul, give me a break. Which way do you want it? He’s just finished saying that he’s not under God’s law. Now he says he’s not free from God’s law. What does he mean? Well, he he takes the time to explain to those not having the law. I became like one not having the law, though I am not free from God’s law, but am under Christ’s law. So he’s not free from all moral obligation, but the structure of the moral obligation under which he finds himself is not the Old Testament, law structure, the law covenant. It’s what he calls Christ’s law. Now what that immediately does, in terms of how we think about these things holistically is raise the question, okay, then, what’s the relationship between Christ’s law and God’s law? That’s what it raises. That’s a biggie, because transparently, there are some things connected with Christ’s law that are not exactly lined up with the law of Moses, with the law of God mediated through Moses. To take easy examples. In Mark chapter seven, Jesus said certain things, and Mark comments this, he said making all foods clean. Well, that’s that’s not exactly God’s law, is it? It was God’s law at the time, but it’s not something that Jesus is mandating for everybody. And Paul himself doesn’t have any problems along those lines. And Peter after the issue with the sheep with a defiled animals. He’s prepared to eat un kosher food. He has a little debate with Paul on the matter a little later in Galatians two but, but nevertheless, in principle, Peter and Paul are in agreement on such matters. Do you see? And the question is, how many other things are are not followed. What exactly is the content of Christ’s law? So we’re getting closer now to the question, in what sense does Jesus fulfill the law of God? We’re getting closer to the issue now, more generally, Paul finishes out the paragraph by saying to the weak, I became weak to win the weak I have become all things to all people, so that by all possible means I might save some In other words, his motivation in being so culturally flexible is precisely evangelism. It’s not because he wants to do these things to stand on his own freedom, but precisely in order to evangelize. That’s a remarkable passage. All right, those are the passages to get our gray cells working to reflect Poirot. Now, let me suggest a handful of ways in which Christ is said to fulfill the law. Before we look at five or six of them, let me mention one other detail.

Don Carson
First, there are some passages in the Old Testament that specifically predict something which is said to be fulfilled by Jesus or in Jesus day. In other words, we’re going to be talking about trajectories and typologies and things like, well, we’ll come to those things in a minute. But there are some cases where you’ve simply got prediction and fulfillment. That’s what you and I commonly think in English, a prophecy is there’s a prediction and then it’s fulfilled. And there are some passages like that in the Bible. For example, when the Magi come and ask, where is he to be born, who is labeled King of the Jews, the experts look up Micah five two and say, In Bethlehem of Judea, for thus it is written. And they quote Micah five two, and they got it right. That’s what Micah five two does say. It’s a prediction, and it was fulfilled, quite literally, verbal prediction fulfilled by an event. There are passages like that or Deuteronomy 1818, in a passage that’s still going to be treated. I can’t remember. It’s tonight or tomorrow morning, but the point is that. A God will raise up a prophet like Moses, which is specifically tied to the Lord Jesus in the New Testament, you see, it’s a verbal prediction, and it’s fulfilled in the coming of Jesus, it was a prophet in some ways, like Moses. So let me suggest some ways in which the New Testament is said, or Jesus is said to fulfill the law number one, the continuation of law as prescription. This is the easiest one, the continuation of law as prescription. For example, the Old Testament in the 10 Commandments, for example, whether you’re quoting Exodus 20 or Deuteronomy five, the Old Testament forbids adultery. The New Testament forbids adultery, and can do so precisely in connection with quoting the Old Testament.

Don Carson
At this level, it’s, it’s, it’s worth pausing for a moment to remind ourselves of a text like Romans chapter 14. In Romans, chapter 14, we read verse five. One person considers one day more sacred than another. Another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord. Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord, for they give thanks to God, and whoever abstains does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. In other words, there are some Old Testament prescriptions, which Paul treats as not binding on Christians in the New Testament, and Christians are free to disagree. One man views one day above another, another man views all days the same. That’s the language that he uses. Let each be fully persuaded in his own mind. But Paul does not say. You cannot imagine Paul saying, one person regards adultery as a really naughty thing, and another person regards adultery as well. Okay, it’s part of your freedom in Jesus. Let each be fully persuaded in his or her own mind. You can’t imagine that, can you? In other words, there are some things that are prohibited or mandated, prescribed legally by the Old Testament, which are equally prescribed, mandated, prohibited by the New Covenant. Now we still want to ask the question, what are those things? Is there a general category? I’ll come to that at the end. All right, but there are some things. There are some points of continuity between the Old Testament and the New Testament law that are simply in terms of continuation of demand. Number two, there are trajectories of various kinds. Now it’s often common to use the word typology, because that’s loaded with so much freight. For some people, I’m going to use the word trajectory. Let’s take one that I’ve already mentioned. At the time of the Exodus, God delivered the people through the great and terrible event of Passover. That is the people of God who feared the Word of God slaughtered a sacrificial lamb and sprinkled the blood of the lamb on the two door posts and the lintel of each home. The people in the home gathered together and ate the lamb, and when the angel of death passed over the house that night, hence the term Passover, the firstborn son was spared. The firstborn animals were spared. Everything that was first born was sanctioned by death, but at the same time, the blood of the lamb meant that the angel of destruction passed over. And in consequence of that release from judgment, God ordained the annual Passover festival. Every Passover season, the Jews were supposed to slaughter a Passover lamb and eat the Passover Lamb, looking back to the release that God had already provided in the Passover event. So the Passover ritual, the Passover festival. The Passover Feast was a way of looking back and remembering how God had destroyed much of Egypt this way, which led, in fact, to the escape from Egypt, the abolition of slavery, crossing the Red Sea. All of the events were tied up with this Passover festival looking back, looking back year one. One, look back at the Passover. Look year two, look back at the Passover. Year three, look back at the Passover. Year four, look back at the Passover. Year 156 look back at the Passover. Year 237 look back at the Passover looking back and looking back and looking back and looking back. But the years keep ticking over, and you keep looking back. And if you’re a thoughtful Israelite, you can’t help but remember that God has spared you, not only at the time of the Passover, but in subsequent events too. He spared them through some of the great, terrible Ordeals of the Sinai desert saved them from Sihon and Og spared them so that although the first generation was wiped out, nevertheless the people did get into the promised land

Don Carson
under Joshua. Then a century goes by, now they look back and remember how, because of their sin and idolatry, they go off into exile, and yet God brings them back from exile, and we’re still looking back here to this release, but there are all of these other releases too, until eventually people must ask the question, so what’s The ultimate release, who finally deals with our sin. Yes, that slaughtered lamb meant that there was a passing over of our sin at the time, but God has passed over our sin so many times since then, yet we still continue sinning. Will there not ever be any release. And you can see Paul’s mind working along exactly those lines, till you begin to realize that the Passover mandated by God to be repeated is not only looking back, it’s anticipating an ultimate release. And Paul picks up his pen and writes, Christ, our Passover has been sacrificed for us.

Don Carson
It was not just an accident of history that Christ died on Passover weekend, that the Lord’s Supper itself was connected in the first instance, with the Jewish Passover. It’s been transmuted, and we’ve learned some lessons from it. Do this in remembrance of me, just as the ancient Jews repeated the Passover in remembrance of what had already been done, but do this until I come, because the Lord’s Supper not only looks back, it looks forward to the end of the age and the ultimate release in the return of Christ. Do you see? So there is a trajectory that is established in time based on an historical event pointing forward to another redeeming historical event, Christ, Jesus, until the culminating event of the return of Christ and the dawning of the new heaven and the new earth. Now that’s one kind of trajectory in which a trajectory itself points forward to Christ. Do you see? It’s not an easy thing. It’s not it’s not as if, when the first Passover sacrifice is offered up, all the Jews were saying, Aha, yeah, I understand this. When this one’s pointing to Jesus, they hadn’t got there yet. The structures were being put in place so that eventually it would get tied in some minds, and certainly after the cross, it would get tied in all Christian minds to the fact that there was a lamb who was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities. The peace of of God was, was, was, was established by him, by His wounds, we are healed, and so on. Do you see so that the pieces get tied together eventually, but a trajectory has to be established until you see the ways in which it points forward. That’s one. It’s an easy one, but there are a lot of them of that sort.

Don Carson
Then there is another one that is much the same, yet it’s a little more subtle. It’s it’s turning on what might be called parallels, not quite analogies, parallels established in the initial structure that are repeated in festivals year after year, year after year after year that also point forward. For example, Leviticus 16 and the Day of Atonement, another great feast day. On the Day of Atonement, according to Leviticus 16, the high priest, and only the high priest, entered into the most holy chamber and. With the blood of bull and goat to pay, not only for his own sin, but also for the sins of the people, and presented the blood before God on top of the Ark of the Covenant under the model wings of the Cherubim. Now picture yourself in ancient Israel. You’ve gone up to the temple for this ritual. You don’t get to go into the most holy place, but you know that God has ordained that the blood of the bull and the goat will cover not only the sins of the priest and his family, but also your sins. You go and present yourself there to God a way of reminding you that at the end of the day, the sentence imposed on sinners is death, and the blood of the bull and the goat symbolize that death. There are other structures to the Day of Atonement. There’s one animal that’s released into the desert, taking your sins far away. It’s another kind of symbolism that’s tied to the same thing. Do you see? But now you’re a thoughtful person, you can’t help but ask yourself, well, thank God, my sins have been looked after one more time. I wonder if I can get through this day without sinning again and waiting till this time next year.

Don Carson
And if you’re very percipient, you might start asking, What has the blood of a bull and goat got to do with anything? I mean, does the bull come along and say, there’s my neck? Slash it? I sacrifice myself for these dirty sinners? There’s no moral value to this sacrifice in human terms, the only sacrifice that’s being made is by the owner of the bull or the goat, for whom the bull and the goat represent quite a lot of money. It. God ordains it ties it to the shedding of blood, the loss of life. Where’s the end of this? And you see once again, that sort of insight into what is the nature of the trajectory is worked out precisely in a book like The Epistle of the Hebrews, where the logic is worked out in great detail. In Hebrews nine and 10, the blood of bull and goat can never take away sin. So before he talks about the nature of the continuities and the analogies and the practicalities and all of that, he deals with some basic home truths that you should see. In any case, at the end of the day, the blood of a goat doesn’t pay for when you cheated on your husband you

Don Carson
it, but it’s a trajectory that’s formed a little more clearly established in retrospect than in prospect, but tied to deep, deep notions about how sin engenders death, and where there is sin, there must be death for any party to be declared free. Then there are also trajectories that establish, I’ll use the expression then you can forgive me, principial obsolescence that’s almost as good as tertium quid, isn’t it? Hebrews chapter eight, and then let me explain what I mean in Hebrews chapter eight, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews has a long quotation in verses starting in verses seven and eight from Jeremiah 31 it’s a well known passage. Many of you will remember the Jeremiah 31 passage, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah, it will not be like the old covenant I made, and so on, so on, so on. So it’s the promise of a new covenant, and it won’t be like the old covenant, right? You’re familiar with that notion with that passage, and he quotes it all the way down to verse 12. Now, there are so many things that he could have done to explain that Old Testament passage in more detail, but in fact, he draws one conclusion. It’s a Corker. Chapter eight, verse 13, by calling this covenant new, that is by Jeremiah, under inspiration of God, calling this promised new covenant new, he has made the first one obsolete. And what is obsolete? And outdated will soon disappear. Do you hear the logic here? The people of God live under the Old Covenant, the covenant mediated through Moses, the covenant established in Mount Sinai, the covenant that Moses is still trying to get ratified and renewed and so on in Deuteronomy now, centuries later, the sixth century BC, Jeremiah promises the coming of a new covenant. Now, if you announce a new covenant, he says that means the established covenant is implicitly declared old. You manage to show that the old covenant is old, then in some sense, in principle, it’s obsolete. In other words, here is a trajectory that establishes the principial obsolescence. It’s obsolete in principle of the Old Covenant. In other words, Hebrews is showing that if you read the Old Testament carefully and this trajectory of the New Covenant. There are a lot of Old Testament passages that promise a new covenant. Ezekiel, 37 promises a new covenant. A lot of them clustered around prophets in the sixth century before Christ. Soon as you get all these passages promising a New Covenant, you made the old one old. Nobody called the covenant with Moses old. Until you promise a new one, you promise a new one, then the covenant becomes the Old Covenant. And that which is old, he said, is in principle, obsolete and ready to disappear 600 years before Christ. So, what on earth are you doing, trying to cling on to it? Now, Paul, the writer of the Hebrew, says, Did you see already, already it’s, it’s principial obsolescence. Its obsoleteness has already been established by the prophet 600 years before Jesus. So what on earth is anybody doing, trying to hang on to it as if it’s still in force? Do you see that still raises the important question of, how do you connect the old covenant with the new covenant? What are the points of continuity and discontinuity? Yeah, we’ll say a bit more about that. But nevertheless, it’s not the case that Christians see themselves as under the Old Covenant anymore, which is precisely why Paul, as we saw in First Corinthians nine, can say, though I am not myself under the law, he’s not under the law covenant. The law covenants dead, dead is a dodo for Paul. Do you see, even though it’s pointing forward and is being fulfilled in some ways, there are points of continuity that go on, yet nevertheless, its obsolescence was already established 600 years before Christ. And there are quite a few of those too, that there’s another one on priesthood in Hebrews seven. That’s a little more complex, but we’ll let it pass. Then there are trajectories that are seen to be trajectories only after the fact. There are trajectories that are seen to be trajectories only after the fact. Now, if I had time, I would unpack the theme of Temple at great length. The temple is the meeting place between God and human beings.

Don Carson
And of course, in one sense, you can view Eden as a kind of Temple that’s where God met human beings already in the first instance. And then you can remember that Jacob, for example, met God at what he calls Bethel house of God, a kind of proto temple without the masonry. And eventually there’s a tabernacle that’s built, and eventually the temple that’s built. And then the temple is destroyed, and a new temple is most of you will know this storyline of the temple and so on. Then you come to the New Testament, and what does Jesus say in John two Destroy this temple, and in three days, I’ll build it again. What temple his opponents didn’t have a clue. Not a clue. For a start, you can’t destroy a temple made of stone without hydraulics and dynamite and build another one in three days. Made even more complex by the fact that it was against the law to use a hammer anywhere within hearing distance of the temple grounds. You know, we can put up a prefab house in two or three days. All you need is a good work crew, a lot of prefab stuff and cheap Foundation, and 40 people and a decent engineer, and you can put up a house. It’s done all the time, but a temple, the great basilicas of Europe often took more than one generation to build. The initial architect never saw the finished work. He was dead. And even the Temple of Solomon took years to accomplish. Jesus comes along and says, Destroy this temple in three days already after he was risen from the dead. John says, Then the disciples remembered his words and believed the scriptures and understood that he was talking about his own body. In other words, here is a trajectory in which Jesus Himself becomes the ultimate temple that is the ultimate meeting place between God. Seven sinners. That’s exactly what a temple is. So Jesus turns out to be the ultimate temple, the ultimate priest, the ultimate sacrifice. All of these trajectories running forward to Christ, and you don’t see all of them, how they work until after the event itself. And then you see, yeah, Jesus. Jesus is my mediator. Jesus is my priest. Jesus is my temple. I I meet God in Jesus I and it’s, Destroy this temple and and I will raise it up. It’s, it’s precisely through the destruction of Jesus as the temple of God that he has constituted the temple of God. It’s a remarkable passage.

Don Carson
Oh, one more. One more. There’s what might be called a moral trajectory in a passage like Romans, chapter 13, verses eight to 10. Paul writes, let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law. Oh, there’s fulfill again, the commandments, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, you shall not covet. And whatever other command there may be are summed up in this one command, love your neighbor as yourself. Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore, love is the fulfillment of the law. In other words, these commands that Jesus quotes are things that stop you from doing harm to someone else. So there’s a sense in which they point forward to the ultimate fulfillment of loving people, such that you don’t harm anybody else. There’s a moral dimension to this fulfillment language Okay, that’s number two, and we’re just about out of time. However, I’ll go fast now. Number three, there are complex combinations of specific traditions riding on trajectories. Let me repeat that there are complex combinations of specific traditions riding on the back of tradition of trajectories. This is easy to understand with an illustration or two. In other words, it’s pretty obvious that there are Old Testament passages that talk about a coming David. They begin in two, Samuel, 714, and following. And you find them in Psalm two and Psalm 16 and many other passages. We just don’t have time to look them all up. But there is an expectation of what the hymn writer calls great David’s greater son. In other words, there’s an expectation of a king David coming, and you find it in passages that we sing every Christmas time because of Handel’s Messiah. Isaiah, chapter nine, that’s eight centuries before Christ. Eight centuries before Christ. We sing for unto us, a child is born unto us, a son is given. Then the verses go on to say, he shall reign on the throne of his father, David, of the increase of His kingdom. There shall be no end, but he shall also be called The Wonderful Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. So now you’ve got a Davidic trajectory. Davidic typology, if you like. That runs right through large parts of the Old Testament, anticipating the great king in David’s line. That, after all, is the way the New Testament begins, isn’t it? The origins of Jesus Christ, the son of Abraham, the son of David, then you have this, you have this genealogy. And the central 14 is, are the years of David’s reign and the reign of his immediate offspring, demonstrating that Jesus is the promised Davidic King, do you see? And then on the back of that, there are all kinds of other kinds of sonship and other notions that are attached. On the back of this Davidic kingship trajectory, a lot of other things are attached. I’m just going to state that I don’t have time to demonstrate it. Number four, there are trajectories of moral analogy. Trajectories of moral analogy. Let me give you one. It’s found twice in the New Testament, first, Corinthians, 10. 10, one to 13, and Hebrews three, seven to the end of the chapter. The argument runs like this, and it has a bearing on the Deuteronomy stuff that we’ve been looking at. The argument runs like this. You can look it up in Hebrews three, seven, and following in due course, the author there quotes Psalm 95 which finds God addressing the people in the days of the Psalms and saying, Today, if you don’t harden your heart, I will give you rest. You hardened your heart when you came up to the promised land, and you didn’t get that rest. But today, you’re in the Promised

Don Carson
Land now, but you still need rest with God. Don’t be like those who fell away. They got out of the land of Egypt. They had enough faith and grace to get out of the land of slavery. They never got into the promised land. So you too. He says, You be careful that you’re not like those of that day who have enough grace to turn away from sin, but you never really enter into the promises of full hearted salvation. You can be saved out from, but not into. Now that’s that raises all kinds of interesting questions. It’s nicely summarized in Hebrews, chapter three, verse 14, you have been made partakers of Christ. You have become sharers of Christ. You become Christians if you hold the beginning of your confidence steadfast to the end. In other words, genuine Christianity by definition, sticks by definition. And here are these people in the desert. Sadly, they’ve had enough faith to get out. They don’t have enough faith to get in. They don’t hold the beginning of their confidence, the opening of the confidence, steadfastly to the end. He says, You don’t be like that. That’s a kind of trajectory of moral analogy. Do you see? And that shows up several times in the New Testament as well. Well, there are others. I’m going to call it quits there and finish this way. Number one is the three fold division of the law valid. No. It. There is no place in the New Testament that unambiguously says we hold to the three fold division of the law, moral, civil and ceremonial law, and only the moral law keeps going. The rest of it. Don’t worry about there’s no passage that sounds like that. There are passages in the New Testament that make distinctions between law and law. For example, in Matthew 2323 you tithe your garden variety herbs, mint, cumin and anise, but you ignore the weightier matters of justice and mercy. So the Bible can weigh the importance of various kinds of laws, but the whole tripartite distinction I find difficult to anchor in the New Testament. But that doesn’t mean that there is no category for what we might call moral law. This is what I hold. I don’t have time to defend it, but I’d be prepared to at some length if you gave me half a shot the traditional way of thinking about moral civil and ceremonial law is that the moral law category establishes what continues from the Old Testament to the new and the other two civil and ceremonial fall away. So you have a moral category being the presupposition of what continues. I think the New Testament works exactly the opposite way around. Namely, you establish the lines of continuity by observing what texts have the same demands. Don’t commit adultery, don’t commit adultery, don’t commit idolatry, don’t commit idolatry. Love your mother and father. Love your mother and father. You observe carefully, exegetically, what are the points of continuous demand, and you define them after the fact as moral law? In other words, I like the category of moral law not as a presupposition for establishing lines of continuity and discontinuity, but as an inference to be drawn, as you see how the New Testament quotes the old and uses the old and applies the old, so that the authority comes not from a presupposition of definition, but from the plain reading of the text in

Don Carson
two more observations. This is the second of three. Reformed theology often speaks of the third use of the law. The first use of the law was to control Israel, to limit its options, to train it in justice and righteousness. The second use of the law was what we’ve been talking about here. It points forward to the coming of Christ. And the third use of the law was applying it to believers themselves, to restrain them and teach them and put in the right context. I’m happy to talk about the third use of the law. I prefer to talk about the fulfillment of the law. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, don’t worry about it. It just means you haven’t come from that tradition. You that tradition. Last there are numerous passages where biblical writers say things like, how I love your law. O God, it’s honey to the heart, sweeter than honeycomb brings light and life. Read passages like Psalm 19, passages of that order. Do you see? And then it’s worth remembering that law the very category law Torah in Hebrew, Torah has the overtone of instruction. It’s not just legislation. The Old Testament, law is not just commandments and prohibitions, it’s instruction. And as soon as you remember that, it seems to me a lot of these kinds of uses of the old how Jesus fulfills these instructions, which instruction includes prohibitions and commandments and so on, nevertheless fit into a larger grid of the whole of the counsel of God, moving us toward a deeper understanding of who Jesus is. Now I just gave you about 10 hours worth of material in one hour. That’s because I have a very, very high estimate of your capacity. And mercifully, everything that is said here is recorded. In any case, you can have another run at it. I think I’ve got time for one question, and that’s about it. Yes, I see that hand. You

Don Carson
I’ve written on many of the passages involved. I don’t have an overview summary of this particular thing, but on the other hand, on the other hand, you have the lecture. Now, I think we’d better call it quits there. Let me there. Let me pronounce the benediction.

Don Carson
Lord God help us. We pray better and better, to understand your most holy Word, to see how it’s put together, to delight in it, to learn from it, to correct ourselves as we become interpreters who do not need to be ashamed as we rightly handle the word of truth we ask in Jesus’ name, amen.