Appendix A: That It May Be Well With Them

any forms of modern Christianity believe that the Decalogue is no longer applicable to human behavior. Those who hold this to be true fall into one of two general categories. The most common form the argument takes is that the Law (by this they mean the 10 Commandments) was made of none effect when the Messiah died on the Cross. The second form states that there was an alteration made to the manner in which some of the commandments are to be kept by believers.

Those in the latter camp suggest that the Sabbath was in fact taken from the seventh day of the week and transplanted to the first when the Messiah died. If challenged on this point, and shown that the Sabbath was still on the seventh day after the crucifixion, (Luke 23:56) they will say at that point that the change was made at Pentecost. Of course, no evidence for this change exists at all, and it is merely assumed (by some) to be true because Christians were described as meeting often on Sundays.

Whereas this is a fact, the book of Acts states that they met every day, (Acts 5:42) and therefore this bit of evidence vanishes immediately. In addition, the Christians were told to learn the teachings of Moses from the Synagogues on Sabbath days; this instruction took place several years after that significant Pentecost, (Acts 15:21) and continued to be valid until enough Churches were established that the Christians could teach their own people in their own establishments.

Those in the first camp generally employ three Scriptures to support their contention that the death of Christ makes the Law void. They are these: “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, [He] took it out of the way, nailing it to His cross; and having spoiled Principalities and Powers, He made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ.” (Colossians 2:14-17) “For Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth.” (Romans 10:4) “[Christ] abolished in His flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in Himself of twain one new man, so making peace.” (Ephesians 2:15)

The first of these passages, from Colossians 2, is particularly interesting, because modern Christianity is not against the 10 Commandments in total, only truly the fourth. Almost any Christian will agree it is wrong to murder, to steal and to commit adultery. They will, if they are conscientious, refrain

[144]

from taking the Lord’s name in vain, and many would rather take a bullet than bow before an image of a pagan god. In fact, nine out of ten commandments will be quite agreeable to the current Christian mind, except for the one concerning the Sabbath day. [1]

Read as it appears in most English translations, verses 14 to 17 of the second chapter of Paul’s epistle to the Colossians do indeed appear to be saying that the Sabbath is not to be an issue for Christians; at least not for Gentile Christians. But a faithful translation of Paul’s actual words tells a very different story. Here is the passage as it appears, for example, in the King James Version of the Bible: “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; [And] having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body [is] of Christ.”

First, we should ask ourselves, “What does Paul mean by the handwriting of ordinances that was against us?” The first thing that should be obvious is that the passage is not saying the ordinances were against us, but that the handwriting (singular) of those ordinances was (singular) against us. If the ordinances were against us, that is to say, the articles of the commandments, the grammar of the sentence would be faulty in both Greek and English. It is not, however, faulty.

The word “handwriting” is the term cheiro-graphon, and it literally means “hand writing,” as accurately translated. What it means from utility, however, is a receipt, a list of something one owes. The word appears only one other place in common religious literature, in the Apocryphal book of Tobit from which we may read the following passage: “Tobias then answered and said, Father, I will do all things which thou hast commanded me: But how can I receive the money, seeing I know him not? Then he gave him the handwriting, and said unto him, Seek thee a man which may go with thee, whiles I yet live, and I will give him wages: and go and receive the money.” [Septuagint, Tobit V.1-3]

The word is the same as in Colossians 2, and has precisely the same meaning. The character Gabael had been entrusted with some money by Tobias’ father, and the “handwriting” was written evidence of the amount that was due upon collection of the debt. Understanding this factor, we now ask ourselves, “What exactly was nailed to the cross?” Paul himself tells us in other words, in another passage from an epistle: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Yahshua, whom God hath set forth to be a Propitiation through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God.” (Romans 3:23-25)

[145]

The blood of Christ, shed at the cross, was for “the remission of sins that are past,” as other Scriptures also declare. The fact that the sins are specified as those that “are past” is significant, because they constitute the very record against us in the “books” of Heaven. (Revelation 20:12) The sins that are not redeemed by faith in the Messiah will stand against every man as a cheirographon, a receipt of debt which none can pay save with death. This was the reason the Son was offered as Propitiation, to pay that debt, “For [the Father] hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.” (2Corinthians 5:21)

The Scripture from Colossians 2, therefore, has nothing to say about the actual ordinances being destroyed, as even Christ declared that He had not come to destroy the Law, but to fulfill it – meaning not to destroy it, or He would be contradicting Himself in the same breath, (Matthew 5:17) but to expound it fully, and in the words of the prophet, to “magnify the law, and make it honourable.” (Isaiah 42:21)

And what of the second half of that passage? It sounds as if Paul is then saying, “Since your past sins have been purged, let no man judge you on these shadows, but the reality is Christ, therefore the days and occasions mean nothing.” The reason many people believe this to be Paul’s intent is because they are unaware that the translators have added a couple of key words into the passage, and these are the ones that appear in [square brackets] from the King James Version passage above, specifically [days] and [is].

If the latter part of that passage is read without the words added during its journey to English, the passage reads, “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body of Christ.” Now it becomes very clear what the apostle’s intention was, and it becomes even clearer if one realizes that Paul was speaking to the Gentile converts of Colossae who had recently been converted from keeping pagan holy days to Jewish ones. Paul himself continued to keep the feast after he had become a Christian, even among gentiles such as those in the city of Philippi. (Acts 18:21, 20:6)

“Let no man therefore judge you,” Paul says in reference to days that are still considered holy, “but (except for) the Body of Christ (the Church).” In other places Paul reinforces this teaching by stating that indeed the Church is the Body of Christ, (1Corinthians 12:12) and indeed it is supposed to judge such matters. (1Corinthians 5:12, 6:1-5)

The next verse may be handled much more simply. It reads, “For Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth.” (Romans 10:4) Those who understand the Scriptures will quickly agree that this is perfectly true, and then go right on keeping the Sabbath in good conscience,

[146]

along with the other nine commandments. Christ is indeed the end of the Law for righteousness; but He is not the “end of the law.” The Law does not make anyone righteous; Paul says it exists to point out sin. “I had not known sin, but by the law; for I had not known lust, except the law had said, ‘Thou shalt not covet.’” (Romans 7:7) John adds that “sin is the transgression of the law,” (1John 3:4) referring specifically to the commandments of the Decalogue. (see verse 24; the Greek word for “commandment,” entole, is uniformly used of the 10 Commandments in the New Testament when the Giver of the entole is God).

There are those who contend, based on this verse, that those who believe the commandments to be valid deny the role of faith. Yet, this argument is nullified when we read that the “heroes of the faith” listed in Hebrews 11 were commandment-keepers. The last Church on earth will certainly understand this principle. (Revelation 14:12) Christ makes one justified, makes one righteous by faith, and thus one is brought into harmony with the law; for there is nothing in him that is contrary to that law after atonement has been effected. From that point forward, with a “new heart and right spirit,” the man finds himself desiring to obey the commandments, “For this is the love of God: that we keep His commandments, and His commandments are not grievous.” (1 John 5:3)

The third passage reads: “[Christ] abolished in His flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in Himself of twain one new man, so making peace.” (Ephesians 2:15) Is this verse out of harmony with the things we have just read?

Ephesians 2 points out that the Messiah made the Jews and Gentiles “one” by abolishing “the law of commandments contained in ordinances.” The question is, can this properly be taken to refer to the 10 Commandments? If the Scriptures can provide any evidence that the Decalogue was ever intended to separate Jew and Gentiles, this argument could be made. As it stands, we read that the Decalogue was given before there were any Jews, and for reasons to benefit all mankind, not to cause divisions between various classes.

It often surprises people to learn that the 10 Commandments did not originate on mount Sinai. One verse that appears to state this as the case is found here: “Thou camest down also upon mount Sinai, and spakest with them from Heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments: and madest known unto them thy holy Sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant.” (Nehemiah 9:13, 14)

It is true that a written record of the 10 Commandments was first given to Moses; however, many things are considered “of Moses” though he merely recorded them. For example, the “law of Moses” is the first place in the Bible that circumcision is transcribed (written) as an ordinance to the

[147]

Hebrews. Yet the practice began as an oral covenant with Abraham centuries earlier. (Genesis 17:10) Even the Messiah called circumcision an element of “the law of Moses,” (John 7:23) therefore the fact that an item of religious significance finds written expression for the first time in the Mosaic Law is not evidence against an earlier origin.

Abraham knew that Yahweh was the “most high God,” above every other spiritual power. (Genesis 14:22) Moses called the making of the golden calf a “great sin,” although the people had not yet read the second article of the Decalogue. (Exodus 32:21) Men began to realize the sacred nature of Yahweh’s name long before it was written that the Most High would not hold one who abused it guiltless. (Genesis 4:26)

In Genesis 4, Cain well knew the command, “Thou shalt not kill,” and Joseph ran away from his master’s wife in order to avoid the crime of adultery, a “sin against God.” (Genesis 39:9) Similarly, there were men considered guilty of sin by breaking the fifth, eight and ninth commandments long before Sinai. The final commandment, that which indicts covetousness, was at the root of many of the problems encountered by the individuals mentioned in the earliest days of human history. Even the Sabbath was called a “commandment” of Yahweh before Sinai, (Exodus 16:25) and Moses used it as a basis for requesting a rest (Shabbat) for the Israelites from Pharaoh (in Exodus 5:5) without being given any explicit, recorded directions for a new day of cessation from work.

Each of the ten was given to the faithful followers of the Most High before the events of Exodus 20, and the reason why was not so that they would be set apart from Gentiles but, as Yahweh Himself says, “that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!” (Deuteronomy 5:29) The “commandments” that kept the Jews and Gentiles apart were the human additions to the Law that actually made void the intentions provided therein by the Almighty. (Matthew 15:3) Perhaps the most dramatic example of this is found in the belief that Hebrews needed to perform ritual washings after making contact with a Gentile before he was clean enough to partake of food. (Mark 7:1-4) These were indeed “enmity” between Jew and Gentile; but the Law of the Most High was to be the same for both the Israelites and the non-Israelites who were traveling with them. (Numbers 15:16) It is impossible, therefore, that this verse in Ephesians is referring to the very commandments given to teach all men who Yahweh is.

Although these three passages addressed here are the most common ones used to say that the commandments are made void by the Messiah’s Sacrifice, they are not the only ones. 2 Corinthians 3:6-11, which calls the Old Testament Laws the “ministry of death,” is used to make the claim that it has been set aside. Yet if the cheirographon factor from Colossians is understood, it becomes apparent that Paul is merely being consistent. Because all men have violated the precepts “engraven in stones,” a system

[148]

of death (i.e., animals sacrifices) was brought into effect to teach humanity that, “Without shedding of blood is no remission.” (Hebrews 9:22) In fact, the book of Hebrews is the only book of the New Testament that ever mentions a “change” made in the law by Christ’s death, and it is exactly the same thing: that the animal sacrifices contained in the rituals of the Law of Moses were brought to an end by the ultimate Sacrifice, Christ Himself. (Hebrews 7:12)

The ministry of death was indeed ended, but the ministry of the Spirit is built over the very principles that actuated the first covenant. A change in covenant never involves a change in the laws governing those covenants – it is merely an alternate and successive agreement.

Historical evidence strongly indicates that early Christians never understood the apostles to either teach or practice the breaking of the 10 Commandments (in accord with Matthew 5:19). The most controversial of the ten, the Sabbath, is one of the best-attested articles of Law both IN the New Testament (being mentioned more often than any of the other nine), and in subsequent non-Canonical records. A few examples follow:

"The Gentile Christians observed also the Sabbath." [Church History, Gieseler, Vol.1, ch. 2, par. 30, 93.]

"The ancient Christians were very careful in the observance of Saturday, or the seventh day...It is plain that all the Oriental churches, and the greatest part of the world, observed the Sabbath as a festival...Athanasius likewise tells us that they held religious assembles on the Sabbath, not because they were infected with Judaism, but to worship Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath, Epiphanius says the same." [Antiquities of the Christian Church, Vol.II Book XX, chap. 3, sec.1, 66. 1137,1138.]

"For although almost all churches throughout the world celebrated the sacred mysteries (the Lord's Supper) on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition, refuse to do this." [Ecclestical History, Socrates, Book 5, chap. 22, p. 289. ]

"It seems to have been customary in the Celtic churches of early times [7th century A.D.], in Ireland as well as Scotland, to keep Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath, as a day of rest from labour. They obeyed the fourth commandment literally upon the seventh day of week." [The Church in Scotland, p.140, James C. Moffatt, D.D., Professor of Church History, Princeton]

"Widespread and enduring was the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath among the believers of the Church of the East and the St. Thomas Christians of India, who never were connected with Rome. It also was maintained among those bodies which broke off from Rome after the Council of Chalcedon namely, the Abyssinians, the Jacobites, the

[149]

Maronites, and the Armenians." [The New Enclopaedia of Religious Knowledge, Schaff-Herzog, emphasis mine]

As those who have completed the main chapters of this book already realize, the only sure way to be free from demonic possession, and to ready one’s self to assist others with this most dangerous condition, is to live a life of which the Almighty approves. The very reason the plague of demons has come upon us, and will soon be manifest in a most dramatic fashion once again, is told to us in the Scriptures in unmistakable terms: “The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant. Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate…” (Isaiah 24:5, 6a)

Yahweh has told us what He requires of us if we wish to be in His service, “to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.” (Micah 6:8) He has also outlined for us the signposts of that humble walk, and if we would be pure, and a blessing to others, we must follow the path laid out by the Messiah, of whom it was predicted:

“Thou hast broken Rahab [i.e., Tehom-at] in pieces, as one that is slain; thou hast scattered thine enemies with thy strong arm. Also I will make [my Servant] my Firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth. My mercy will I keep for Him for evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with Him. His Seed [the Church] also will I make to endure forever, and His throne as the days of heaven. If His children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments, if they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments, then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes.

“Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I not utterly take from Him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail. My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.” (Psalm 89:10, 27-34)

Because of the lovingkindness of the Almighty toward His Son and those whom He has chosen, there are those of us who know these sacred truths, and can make a difference. We have been given the power over evil spirits, and a “ministry of reconciliation” by which we can do more than cast out devils; we can teach mortal men how to live forever, and how to be at peace with the One who made them and preserves them in life.

1 – Note: A charge often leveled against Adventists, and other Sabbath-keeping groups, is that they tend to “emphasize” the Sabbath. This, however, is merely a result of the times. If modern Christendom were involved in open adultery more often than Sabbath-breaking, the focus on those for whom the law has meaning would doubtless swing from the fourth to the seventh commandment.

[150]