Have you thought about how drastically the New Covenant alters the understanding of the 10 Commandments?
In our Wineskins study, our family recently reviewed the long version of the first three (so far) of those holy commands carved into stone by the finger of God. Previously we had considered the difference in purpose in why those commands were imposed in the first place, but this time we are taking them one at a time, comparing how the detail wording coincides with the revelation of Christ and his transforming work upon the Cross.
Filtered by the Blood:
#1 How does the revelation of the persons of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as the triune God mesh with how we are to understand this first command that declares that believers are to have no other gods before him? This question cuts to the core of why the first century Jews concluded that Jesus must be blaspheming in his claim of being the Son of God. As they rightly concluded, he was making himself equal with God, and that idea was not recognizable within the wording of this very first command. Nevertheless, the command remains true as stated–it is the understanding that must change.
#2 As a quote taken from Wineskins: “The irony within the NC [New Covenant] is that although idolatry violated the second commandment, it is the very thing that the gospel professes.” Consider that idolatry is about misrepresentation in devotion to God. But what happens when One shows up who perfectly represents God, who gives all glory to Him, and who claims to so transform believers by his blood-covering as to make them holy image-bearers, partial representatives, and “ye are gods”?!
#3 If God declares in this command that blasphemy against God can never be forgiven, why is it that Jesus makes a distinction in reiterating this unpardonable sin when directed against the Holy Spirit, but not universally against himself? How is it that this command applies selectively within the Trinity?
Not only has the purpose of the Ten Commandments changed for Christians, but so has the understanding of what eternal principles are to be retained. Those who submit themselves to the alterations imposed by Jesus, demonstrate their acceptance of his Lordship over their lives. Those who persist in upholding the original purposes and traditional meanings reveal their preference for the Law over the Lawgiver, and that is why Scripture declares that until they profess “blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord” they will not see him again.
So that in all things, even over how we are to relate to the Law, Jesus might have the supremacy!
How can you see Jesus fulfillment with these first three commands? How do the underlying principles continue today?