Tablets of Stone

Chapter Eight
The Tablets Of Stone, Or Ten Commandments, As A Covenant Document, Had A Historical Beginning And A Historical End

The moment we say that the Ten Commandments are finished as a covenant, it is impossible for some people to understand what we are actually saying. In their confusion, they think they hear us saying, "Away with the moral law." It does not matter how often or how loudly we affirm our belief in both moral law per se and specifically the enduring moral principles of nine of the ten commandments written on the Tablets of the Covenant. That is not enough for these people. They insist that we acknowledge that the Ten Commandments as written on the Tablets of Stone at Mt Sinai are "the eternal unchanging moral laws of God." It is all or nothing. It is impossible to even discuss the clear Biblical reasons we have for rejecting such a theological view.

The New Testament Scriptures are clear that Ten Commandments are finished as a covenant contract between God and Israel. We are NOT saying that the morality contained in the individual commandments is finished. But we are talking about the Ten Commandments considered as a legal contract, specifically as a covenant document. The moral duties commanded on the Tablets of Stone did not begin at Sinai but the use of those duties as the basis of a covenant did begin at Sinai. Nine of the ten commandments were known by men and punished by God long before and after God gave them to Israel as a covenant at Sinai. Every specific duty commanded in the Ten Commandments except the fourth, or Sabbath, was punished before Mt Sinai, and likewise, every commandment except the fourth, is repeated in the NT Scriptures.

We may disagree with each other on many things about the "the law" but we cannot deny that the Bible clearly teaches the following things:

1.Some specific "law" had a historical beginning.

2.That same "law" had a historical end.

3.The historical beginning of that "law" is always associated with the giving of the Tablets of the Covenant to Israel at Sinai.

4.The historical ending of that "law" is always connected with the coming of Christ and the establishment of the New Covenant.

It is possible that we totally misunderstand exactly what specific law the Bible is talking but is it not possible to deny that the above four facts are clearly taught in the Bible. The Scriptures make it impossible for that law to be anything other than the Ten Commandments written on the Tablets of Stone and given to Israel at Sinai as the covenant foundation of their relationship to God. It cannot possibly refer to the "ceremonial" law. Nor can it be talking about the "law of conscience." It has to refer to the law covenant at Sinai.

As already mentioned, the historical beginning of the law covenant recorded on the Tablets of Stone coincided with the beginning of the Nation of Israel. In chapter four we saw these facts set forth clearly in the texts of Scripture that talk about the Ten Commandments.

There is simply no way to understand the following passage of Scripture if we deny that the law has both a historical beginning and historical ending:

For before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. ROM 5:13

The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more. Rom 5:20

What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was put into effect through angels by a mediator. GAL 3:19

So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law. Gal 3:24,25

The words "before the law" in Rom 5:13 cannot possibly refer to anything other than the covenant given at Mt Sinai. The "law" did not exist before that time. The words "before the law" mean "before the law." Those words clearly mean that the "law" had a historical beginning at Mt Sinai.

The words "the law was added" make no sense if the law was already there. The law was added at Sinai or Paul is talking nonsense. The law that was "added" at Sinai had reference specifically to "transgressions." The ministry of the law that began at Sinai ended when Christ came. There has to be both a historical beginning and ending to the law or Paul is talking in circles. There was a given point in time when this law "was put in charge" and there was another point in time when we ceased to be any longer "under the supervision of the law."

We must all agree that Paul did not mean that mankind, at Mt Sinai first became aware of moral laws and received for the first time a consciousness that he was to obey those moral laws. How could we explain the behavior of Joseph as a believer and Abimelech as an unbeliever? How could we understand Paul's argument in Rom 2:14? No, Paul is not talking about the effects of conscience in these passages.

We must also agree that Paul is not denying that God, before Sinai, punished behavior that was contrary to the moral duties set forth in the law given at Sinai as a covenant. The flood did not occur because God did not feel well that day. That event was the direct result of men and women living in a manner which they had every reason to know was displeasing to God. They were living in total disobedience to the very moral laws that were "given" to Israel at Sinai. There was a "law" given at Sinai for the first time and there was also a "law" in existence before Mt Sinai. But whatever "law" began at Sinai also forever ended at the cross. However, there is another kind of "law" that continues in the Christian life. If this sounds a bit confusing and contradictory, we are only stating the specific problems that different theological writers find in Paul's habit of using the "law" in several different senses.

It is obvious to us that Paul, in the verses just quoted, is talking about the Ten Commandments purely in covenant terms. This has to be the meaning of the word "law" in Gal 3 and 4. Gal 3:13,14 tells us that Christ died under the law and delivered us from its curse. That can only be the Tables of Stone. The "law" that came 430 years after the promise to Abraham is, at least on the surface, totally different from the promise of the gospel given to Abraham. The question in verse 21 would be totally unnecessary. The fact that Paul spends so much time in answering the problem with a carefully worded argument proves the reality of a problem. The argument is so careful that it builds a key point on the use of the singular "seed" instead of seeds (3:16). The question in Gal 3:19 is unnecessary if there is no difference at all in the promise to Abraham and the Law of Moses. Why explain the difference between two things if they are the same?

The law in Gal 3 had the power to "imprison the whole world" and prove it was "guilty before God" (vss 21- 23). The Jewish ceremonial law could never do that. The words in verse 20 can only refer to the giving of the law at Mt Sinai. The law in Gal 4:4 is the law covenant under which Jesus was born and under which He died. Gal 4:24 & 25 removes all doubt as to what Paul means by "the law" in this whole context:

These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. Gal 4:24,25

The moment we admit that Paul, in the passages, is obviously talking about the Tables of Stone on which was written the Ten Commandments, or terms of the Old Covenant, it resolves the whole problem and Paul's statements about the law immediately fit together in perfect harmony. We see that when Paul speaks in negative terms about the law, its weaknesses, or its final demise, he is referring to the law covenant (Ten Commandments) written on the Tablets of Stone. When he speaks of the law in a good sense and applies it to us today, he is speaking of the moral duties contained in the individual laws which continue after Ten Commandments, as the covenant document, are finished.

The reader is almost sure to be thinking, "That sounds correct. However, if such an easy answer is clearly set forth in the Bible, why do so many preachers and theologians miss it?" Some people cannot hear what Paul is saying simply because it will not fit into the theological system that they have imposed on the Bible. In that system, the Ten Commandments cannot be viewed as a distinct and separate covenant made only with Israel. The Ten Commandments written on stone tablets at Mt Sinai simply must be identical in every respect to the so called "covenant of works" with Adam in Eden. The Ten Commandments simply cannot begin at Sinai in any sense whatever in that particular system. It is absolutely essential as the "good and necessary consequence" of Covenant Theology that the law did not begin at Sinai or the whole system is destroyed. We are told that the words "Before the law" cannot be referring to the Ten Commandments in any sense whatever! The Bible clearly says otherwise.

We will not take time to cover the other verses quoted. The reader need only read the verses and try to fit his view of the Ten Commandments into those clear statements concerning the historical beginning and historical ending of the "the law" and see if they match.

We saw in chapter seven that the Ten Commandments, or Tablets of Stone, considered as the covenant that was kept in the Ark of the Covenant in the Most Holy Place, were finished when the veil of the temple was rent from top to bottom (Mt 27:51). Those Tablets were instantly as obsolete as Aaron and the sacrifices.

The following facts summarize Paul's understanding of the purpose and function the Ten Commandments today:

1.A New Covenant was ratified in the blood of Christ at the cross. The Old Covenant written on the Tablets of Stone at Sinai have been "fulfilled" and done away. The claims of the Old Covenant have been met; it's curse has been endured and removed; and it's blessings have been secured by Christ and bestowed on His Church.

2.A new people or nation was "born in a day" at Pentecost. The true "holy nation" of "kings and priests" (the true Israel of God) came into being (Compare Ex 19:4,5 and I Pet 2:9-11).

3.A new approach to God was opened up the moment the veil was rent from top to bottom. It was the Tablets of Stone that blocked the way into the presence of God's presence, but now the terms of the covenant written on stone (Ten Commandments) have been fully met and we enter boldly into the Most Holy Place (Heb 10:1-23).

4.A new status, Sons of God, with new privileges was given to the "grown up" people of God.

5.A new Pedagogue took over in the conscience of the new covenant believer. The Tables of Stone were, in themselves, the old Pedagogue in the conscience of an Israelite. That old Pedagogue has been dismissed (Gal 3:24,25) and been replaced by the indwelling Holy Spirit.