Previously I began to address the radical nature of law vs. gospel within the scriptural context. But, did not set out any nuance (mainly because I am not fond of nuance-ing everything). This post is an attempt at that.
If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood—why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?
Not only did death come via the Law but perfection could not be attained through it. The Law was created to pass away.
For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also.
The priesthood is no longer with Aaron and his heirs but is now with Melchizedek and his heir. And with this heir there comes a change in the Law. But saying the Law has changed seems okay. It's kosher within Christian circles to say the nature of the Law changed but isn't set aside. Yet, the bible leaves us no room for the comfortable.
The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless...
The Law was created to pass because it is weak and useless. The goal was perfection and the Law was useless in achieving this goal. Ergo, it has to pass.
...and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.
This hope is one of an indestructible life. Again, the tension of death vs. life. Death in and by the Law and life in and by Christ.
Through whom we live and move and have our being.
No comments:
Post a Comment