ris3n's Apologetics Codex

Source

Are Christians Still Under The Law (ris3n)

Executive summary

There are ads on our codex that pay for hosting and keep the codex free. If you can, please consider whitelisting ris3n.com or allowing scripts to support the work.

Sponsored

A short ris3n.com article (~1,200 words) arguing that the Mosaic Law was a temporary, blood-sealed covenantal system that pointed forward to Christ. With the New Covenant inaugurated by Jesus' blood and the inauguration of a Melchizedekian priesthood, believers are no longer under the Law as a governing covenant, they live under grace, where obedience flows from a settled relationship rather than from probationary covenant maintenance. The argument is structurally driven by Hebrews 7:11-12 ("when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also") and Hebrews 8:13 ("He has made the first obsolete").

Key claims

  • Biblical covenants are not mere promises; they are blood-sealed binding relationships that change a person's standing before God (Exod 24:6-8).
  • The Mosaic Law revealed sin and demanded repeated sacrifice but could not permanently remove guilt; it functioned as a tutor (paidagogos) leading to Christ (Gal 3:24-25).
  • Jesus came to fulfill, not abolish, the Law (Matt 5:17). "Fulfill" means to bring to its intended goal, not to cancel morality.
  • Christ is the end (telos) of the Law for righteousness (Rom 10:4), i.e., the Law as the means by which righteousness is obtained is brought to completion in Him.
  • The Last Supper inaugurated the New Covenant in Jesus' blood (Luke 22:20), which God had promised through Jeremiah (Jer 31:31-34), internal law, complete forgiveness.
  • The Old Covenant is now obsolete as a governing covenant (Heb 8:13), replaced, not repaired or run in parallel.
  • A change of priesthood necessitates a change of law (Heb 7:11-12). Levitical priesthood → Melchizedekian priesthood means the Law-system attached to the Levites is also superseded.
  • Melchizedek's priesthood is greater than the Levitical because Melchizedek blessed Abraham and received Abraham's tithe (Gen 14:18-20), and the Levites descend from Abraham. Confirmed messianically by Ps 110:4.
  • God Himself is the Redeemer (Isa 43:11; Isa 53:4-6); the same God who required sacrifice provides the final sacrifice in Christ.
  • Living under grace is not antinomian, Jesus called for deeper righteousness from the heart (Matt 15:11; Mark 2:27-28). Obedience continues; its foundation changes from covenant-maintenance to settled relationship.

Arguments made

Change-of-Priesthood Argument (the article's load-bearing argument)

  • Premises:
  1. Every covenantal system has a priesthood attached to it (article assumption, drawn from the Levitical / Aaronic system under Moses).
  2. The Mosaic Law and the Levitical priesthood are inseparably bound (Heb 7:11-12).
  3. Scripture appoints the Messiah as a priest "according to the order of Melchizedek" (Ps 110:4), distinct from the Levitical line.
  4. Therefore the priesthood has been changed.
  5. "When the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also" (Heb 7:12).
  • Conclusion: The Mosaic Law is no longer the governing covenantal system for those in Christ.
  • Strength: Strong as a reading of Hebrews 7-8 in its own terms; contested at the inter-tradition level (see Tensions).

Superiority-of-Melchizedek Argument

  • Premises:
  1. Melchizedek blessed Abram and received a tithe from him (Gen 14:18-20).
  2. The lesser is blessed by the greater; tithes flow from lesser to greater.
  3. The Levitical priests descend from Abraham (so are "in" Abraham at Gen 14).
  4. Therefore Melchizedek's priesthood is greater than the Levitical priesthood (this is the classical Hebrews 7:4-10 inference, presupposed by the article).
  • Conclusion: The Messianic / Melchizedekian priesthood holds higher authority than the Levitical, justifying the priestly succession Christ inaugurates.
  • Strength: Strong within the framework of Hebrews; the article presents the inference compactly rather than defending it against alternative readings.

Obsolescence Argument (from Jeremiah and Hebrews)

  • Premises:
  1. God promised a new covenant unlike the Sinai covenant (Jer 31:31-34).
  2. Jesus inaugurated that new covenant in His own blood at the Last Supper (Luke 22:20).
  3. Scripture says calling it "new" makes the first one obsolete (Heb 8:13).
  • Conclusion: The Old Covenant is no longer the active covenantal framework.
  • Strength: Direct textual chain; the contested move is whether "obsolete as governing covenant" entails "no longer applicable in any form" (the article allows the latter; other traditions do not, see Tensions).

Evidence cited

Connections to existing codex

Quotes worth keeping

"When the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also.", citing Heb 7:12, presented as the article's structural pivot.

"When He said, 'A new covenant,' He has made the first obsolete.", citing Heb 8:13, the explicit obsolescence claim.

"The Law prepared. Jesus fulfilled.", closing slogan capturing the article's thesis.

"Living under grace does not mean living without obedience. It means living under a completed work of redemption rather than under a probationary covenant system.", closing rebuttal to the antinomianism worry.

Tensions surfaced

The article takes a strongly supersessionist reading: the Mosaic Law is replaced, not merely re-applied. This conflicts with several positions ris3n's notes touch on (and which other ingests will likely surface):

  • Reformed covenantal theology (e.g., Westminster tradition): typically distinguishes moral / civil / ceremonial law and holds the moral law (Decalogue) still binding under the New Covenant; only ceremonial / civil have been abrogated. The article collapses these distinctions and treats "the Law" monolithically.
  • Theonomy / Christian Reconstructionism: holds the Mosaic civil law remains the standard for civil polity. Directly contradicted by the article's framing.
  • Hebrew Roots / Messianic / Torah-observant Christianity: treats the Torah as still binding for believers (Jewish and/or Gentile). Directly contradicted.
  • Sabbatarianism (incl. Seventh-Day Adventism): treats the Sabbath command as moral and perpetual. The article's appeal to Mark 2:27-28 and Matt 15:11 is set against this position without engaging it.
  • Catholic / Orthodox sacramental priesthood: views the New Covenant priesthood as an ongoing ministerial order. The article's "Melchizedekian priesthood" is read in a more uniquely Christological frame; it doesn't engage the ministerial-priesthood question.
  • Internal load-bearing inference: "change of priesthood ⇒ change of law" (Heb 7:12) is doing structural work for the whole argument. The article does not consider whether a narrower reading (the Levitical priestly law changes, while moral law continues) would weaken its supersessionist conclusion.

The codex records these positions fairly without arbitrating. When a competing source is ingested, add a ## Tensions block to the relevant concept page rather than overwriting.

Open questions / follow-ups

  • Bible references with no stub (verses ris3n cites that ris3n hasn't noted in the source notes):
  • Exodus 24:6-8, covenant-blood at Sinai (load-bearing for the article's "covenants are blood-sealed" thesis).
  • Mark 2:27-28, only Mark 2.28 stub exists; the 27-28 unit is the article's full citation.
  • Matthew 15:11, defilement-from-the-heart saying.
  • Romans 10:4, "Christ is the end of the Law."
  • Hebrews 7:11-12, load-bearing for the article's "change of priesthood ⇒ change of law" inference. Strong candidate for promotion.
  • Genesis 14:18-20, Melchizedek-blesses-Abram; foundational for the Melchizedekian priesthood concept hub.
  • These are flagged for ris3n to triage; a note-side mention would unlock them in the next regen pass.
  • Entities mentioned but not yet hub'd: Abraham (very high-priority, appears far beyond this source).
  • Concepts mentioned but not yet hub'd: Substitutionary atonement, Paidagogos (already covered as Law as Tutor (Paidagogos)), Levitical priesthood (could be its own hub or remain a sub-section under Melchizedekian Priesthood).
  • Things to investigate further:
  • Compare ris3n's reading of Heb 7:11-12 against a Reformed (e.g., Owen, Vos) vs. a dispensational (e.g., Ryrie, Walvoord) treatment when those sources are ingested.
  • Source the historical patristic reception of Melchizedek typology (Justin, Cyprian, Ambrose), none cited here.
  • Track whether Sabbath / food-law treatment becomes a recurring tension across ingested sources; if so, build a Sabbath concept hub.