Thursday, October 27, 2022

3 Nephi 15:9 and Jesus saying "I am the Law"

  

Behold, I am the law, and the light. Look unto me, and endure to the end, and ye shall live; for unto him that endureth to the end will I give eternal life. (3 Nephi 15:9)

 

There has recently been a controversy online due to this verse in the Book of Mormon as Jesus says “I am the Law of Moses” in The Chosen, and this has triggered a number of Protestants. According to some, this is evidence of the Law of Moses, in the theology of the Book of Mormon, being salvific and/or not being abrogated with the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. However, this is false for many reasons.

 

Even during Old Testament times, when they were under the Law of Moses, the Book of Mormon prophets were explicit that the Law of Moses was not salvific. For instance, Abinadi stated that:

 

And now ye [the critics of Abinadi] have said that salvation cometh by the law of Moses. I say unto you that it is expedient that ye should keep the law of Moses as yet; but I say unto you, that the time shall come when it shall no more be expedient to keep the law of Moses. And moreover, I say unto you, that salvation doth not come by the law alone; and were it not for the atonement, which God himself shall make for the sins and iniquities of his people, that they must unavoidably perish, notwithstanding the law of Moses. (Mosiah 13:27-28)

 

Speaking of converted Lamanites who would join the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi, we read that

 

Yea, and they did keep the law of Moses; for it was expedient that they should keep the law of Moses as yet, for it was not all fulfilled. But notwithstanding the law of Moses, they did look forward to the coming of Christ, considering that the law of Moses was a type of his coming, and believing that they must keep those outward performances until the time that he should be revealed unto them. Now they did not suppose that salvation came by the law of Moses; but the law of Moses did serve to strengthen their faith in Christ; and thus they did retain a hope through faith, unto eternal salvation, relying upon the spirit of prophecy, which spake of those things to come. (Alma 25:15-16)

 

Nephi, writing centuries earlier, understood that salvation came through Christ and not the Law of Moses, notwithstanding the people having to keep the Law of Moses as they were still under the Old Covenant. On this, as well as the meaning of “after all we can do,” see my friend James Stutz’s article, “After All We Can Do” as a reference to the Law of Moses.

 

With respect to 3 Nephi 15:9, let us read the verses prior to such for context:

 

And now it came to pass that when Jesus had ended these sayings he cast his eyes round about on the multitude, and said unto them: Behold, ye have heard the things which I taught before I ascended to my Father; therefore, whoso remembereth these sayings of mine and doeth them, him will I raise up at the last day. And it came to pass that when Jesus had said these words he perceived that there were some among them who marveled, and wondered what he would concerning the law of Moses; for they understood not the saying that old things had passed away, and that all things had become new. And he said unto them: Marvel not that I said unto you that old things had passed away, and that all things had become new. Behold, I say unto you that the law is fulfilled that was given unto Moses. Behold, I am he that gave the law, and I am he who covenanted with my people Israel; therefore, the law in me is fulfilled, for I have come to fulfil the law; therefore it hath an end. Behold, I do not destroy the prophets, for as many as have not been fulfilled in me, verily I say unto you, shall all be fulfilled. And because I said unto you that old things have passed away, I do not destroy that which hath been spoken concerning things which are to come. For behold, the covenant which I have made with my people is not all fulfilled; but the law which was given unto Moses hath an end in me. (3 Nephi 15:1-8)

 

Brant Gardner offered the following commentary:

 

[vv. 3-5]:

 

The old things (the law of Moses) have “passed away”—not by being removed or torn down but by being fulfilled or completed. Indeed, it might be more accurate to say that they have been transformed. They are still the law but are transformed into something new: the law of the gospel.

 

Yahweh-Messiah explains that, since he is the lawgiver, he has the right and power to fulfill and transform it. Of course, much of the Nephite understanding of God already presaged this change, so little in the gospel would have been surprising to them. The change would more likely affect ritual practices than individual religious understanding or devotion.

 

[vv. 6-7]

 

Jesus echoes the language of 3 Nephi 13:17 where he had also indicated that he had come to fulfill, not destroy, the law. He now links that promise to the concept that old things have passed away—a transformation rather than a destruction. Jesus explains that he is fulfilling and transforming that which had been “spoken concerning things which are to come.” Living the law of Moses affected how a person would face God at the end. That ultimate judgment has not changed. Indeed, the Messiah’s gospel exchanges our ability to stand transformed, or fulfilled, before God at that last day.

 

[vv. 8-9]

 

Jesus explains verse 7 more explicitly in the connection between these two statements. The law of Moses is fulfilled; and in Jesus-as-fulfillment, we may eventually have eternal life. Thus, while changes in practice may occur, the goal does not. Indeed, the gospel improves our ability to reach the ultimate goal of eternal life. Believers would no longer attempt to achieve eternal life by observing the law of Moses but rather by living the gospel and enduring to the end or persisting until the process is complete. (Brant A. Gardner, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon, 6 vols. [Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2007], 5:474-75, comments in square brackets added for clarification)

 

Interestingly, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, “the prince of preachers,” used similar language to describe Jesus. In a sermon "Jehovah Tsidkenu-The Lord Our Righteousness" he taught that

 

the text speaks about righteousness too—"Jehovah our righteousness." And he is so. Christ in his life was so righteous, that we may say of the life, taken as a vehicle, that it is righteousness itself. Christ is the law incarnate Understand me. He lived out the law of God to the very full, and while you see God's precepts written in fire on Sinai's brow, you see them written in flesh in the person of Christ.

 

While one disagrees with Spurgeon attempting to support imputed righteousness in his sermon (see Response to a Recent Attempt to Defend Imputed Righteousness), I don’t think anyone in their right mind would charge Spurgeon with the charge of believing the Law of Moses was not abrogated with the death and resurrection of Jesus, that the Law of Moses is salvific, etc.


This is not a novelty among Protestants and others. 16th-century German Protestant theologian Johann Pistorius, in 1553, wrote that:

 



 

Lex est sapientia Dei; Christus est sapientia Dei; ergo Christus est lex (English: The Law is the Wisdom of God; Christ is the Wisdom of God; therefore, Christ is the Law)

 

Source: "Johannes Pistorius til Paul Noviomagus, Wittenberg, 27 June 1553," in A. Andersen, comp., Quattuor Centuriae Epistolarum: Provst Johannes Pistorius' Brevsamling 1541-1605 (1614) (Historisk Samfund for Sønderjylland, 1971), 50

 

Same Protestants who are triggered by this:

 



 

say “Amen” to the following:

 



Update: Dan Lioy on Jesus as the Torah in the Gospel of John


The following is taken from:

 

Dan Lioy, Jesus as Torah in John 1-12 (Eugene, Oreg.: Wipf and Stock, 2007), 6-10

 

Recognizing Jesus as Torah in the Fourth Gospel

 

In the previous section, the Lord Jesus was referred to as the divine, incarnate Torah. Casselli helps establish the rationale for this designation noting that in the Fourth Gospel, the Evangelist presented the Messiah “in a way that is consistent with the Judaisms of his day.” The depiction one encounters is “profoundly Torah centered.” (Casselli, “Jesus as eschatological Torah,” 16) Furthermore, in keeping with the Evangelist’s end-time theological perspective, he portrayed the Son as the “eschatological Torah itself.” In point of fact, the entire “scope of Jewish theology” is re-read “through the lens” of the Savior’s “death, resurrection, and ascension.” (Casselli, Jesus as eschatological Torah,” 17) Likewise, the “interpretive traditions” that form the historical and cultural backdrop of the Fourth Gospel must be viewed through the Torah-fulfillment prism of Jesus’ redemptive mission. (Casselli, “Jesus as eschatological Torah,” 18)

 

According to Keener, Jesus as the perfection of the gift of the Torah is a recurrent theme first introduced in John 1:1-18 and reiterated throughout the Fourth Gospel. [23] While there are other conceptions of God—including those of Wisdom [24] and the Word [25]—none of these eclipses that of Torah to convey the “thought of one who was divine yet distinct from the Father.” [26]

 

With the advent of the Son, the Father did not just break His “prophetic silence” and speak again. More importantly, the incarnation of the divine torah “means that all God had already spoken was contained in Jesus, the ultimate embodiment of all God’s Word.” (Keener, John, 1:361) In short, Jesus as Torah functions as dominant leitmotif (together with Logos) to conceptualize the totality of the person and work of the Son. Moreover, it is a powerful Christological symbol that illumines all the other major themes appearing in the Fourth Gospel. Jesus as Torah is the center from which the divine plan of redemption, as conveyed in John’s Gospel, is fulfilled.

 

Notes for the Above

 

[23] Keener, John, 1:278. He explains that the “prologue presents Jesus as Torah, greater than Moses” (1:51). Also, the role the Son plays in the Fourth Gospel mirrors that of the Torah “in contemporary Judaism” (1;361). With respect to the latter, Jaffee (“Torah,” 13:9231) states that “in Judaism,” the word tôrâ was “the quintessential symbol.” In like manner, Sanders (“Torah and Christ,” 381) notes that by the first century of the common era, the “Torah was . . . the symbol par excellence, incomparable, indestructible, and incorruptible, of Judaism.” Indeed, the Torah “meant Judaism’s identity and way of life” (cf. Sir 45:5; John 5:39; Rom 7:10; Gal 3:21). Marshall (“Johannine theology,” 2:1085) adds that “rabbinic Judaism” spoke of the Torah “in personal terms,” declared it to be “preexistent and an agent in creation,” and referred to the Torah as “the giver of light and life” to humanity. In the view of Davies (Torah, 93), the Fourth Gospel epitomizes Jesus as “the personalized Torah” of Judaism.

 

[24] Reed (“How Semitic was John”), based on his study of the Old Testament Apocrypha, concludes that an “amalgamation evolved between the Greek sophia (wisdom) and the Greek logos (word)” in which the two terms were viewed as “synonymous” (716; cf. Wis 9:1-2; 2 Enoch 3:8). Over time, “the rabbis parted with wisdom and settled for Torah, or law” (719). Correspondingly, Glasson’s examination of the rabbinic writings from the Second Temple period of Judaism suggests that Wisdom was believed to have its source in the Torah (cf. Sir 15:1; 19:20; 39:1). In addition, Wisdom was so identified with the Torah that there was a transference to the Torah of what had been ascribed to Wisdom (Moses, 87-88; cf. Bar 3:29-4:1; Gab Rab. 17;5; 31:5; 44:17; Lev Rab 11:3; 19:1; 4 Macc 1:16-17; Sir 24:1, 23-24; 34:8; Wis 18:15). Carson (John, 1:354) proposes that the Evangelist favored “Logos because ‘Word’ had broader OT connotations more apt to conjure up the image of Torah,” yet “without excluding the common nuances his readers would have associated with Wisdom.” Also cf. Beyler, Torah, 127-30; Coloe, God dwells with us, 62, 214; Epp, “Wisdom, Torah, Word,” 132-33, 135; Evans, Word and glory, 130; Heschel, Heavenly Torah, 681-82; Lincoln, John, 96; McGrath, John’s apologetic Christology, 151-52, 154, 177; Sidebottom, The Christ of the Fourth Gospel, 34; Thompson, God of the Gospel of John, 130-133; Whitacre, John.

 

[25] Reed (“How Semitic was John”) points out that “several times the LXX uses logos (word) to refer to the Torah either literally or in an abstract form” (cf. Exod 35:1; Deut 1;1; Ps 119:105). He suggests that “some Jewish writers and translators had no qualms about replacing logos with nomos.” In effect, the “two terms became synonymous in Jewish thought” (718). In like manner, Casselli (“Jesus as eschatological Torah”) argues that when the Evangelist employed the Greek noun logos (cf. John 1:1, 14), he was thinking of the Old Testament phrase rendered “the word of the Lord” (25). In light of the connections between the Fourth Gospel and the “Pentateuchal tradition,” it is quite probable that the Evangelist considered logos to be “basically interchangeable with Torah” (26). This supposition is confirmed by the Septuagint referenced to the Ten Commandments (which the Lord gave to Moses on Mount Sinai) as tous deka logous or the “ten words” (Exod 34:28; Deut 10:4; cf. Exod 24:3; Deut 32:47). Further confirmation is found when the Septuagint version of the following Old Testament verses are considered: Isaiah h1:10, in which logon kyriou (“word of the Lord”) and nomon theou (“law of God”) are used in synonymous parallelism; Isaiah 2:3 and Micah 4:2, in which nomos (“law”) and logos kyriou (“word of the Lord”) are used in synonymus parallelism; Isaiah 5:24, in which nomos kyriou (“law of the Lord”) and logion (“word”) are used in synonymous parallelism; and Jeremiah 6:19, in which logion (“words”) and nomon (“law”) are used in synonymous parallelism; and Jeremiah 6:19, in which logon (“words”) and nomon (“law”) are used in synonymous parallelism; cf. Beyler, Torah, 121-22. There is enough precedent to conclude that both logos and nomos denote “the “independent personified expression of God” (Danker, Greek-English lexicon, 610).

 

[26] Keener, John, 1:281. He proposes that the Evangelist addressed a “community of predominately Jewish Christians” who, due to their “faith in Jesus,” had been “rejected by most of their non-Christian Jewish communities.” One can imagine the religious elite of the day making the following claims: (1) Judaism is a “religion of Torah”; and 92) the “prophetic, messianic Jesus movement has departed from proper observance of God’s Word (particularly from orthodox monotheism)” (1:364). The Evangelist responded in the Fourth Gospel with these counterclaims: (1) the Messiah is the “full embodiment of Torah” and completes “what was partial (but actually present) I Torah”; (2) the Son “embodies the hope of Judaism” (1:417); (3) the decision to become a follower of the savior “entails true observance of Torah”; and 94) because “Jesus himself is God’s Word,” no person is able to “genuinely observe Torah without following Jesus” (1:364). Keener’s proposal helps us explain why, as Whitacre (Johannine polemic, 29) observes, “every explicit dispute in John makes reference to Moses and/or the Law” (cf. 1:17, 45; 2:22; 5:39, 45-47; 6:32; 7:19, 22-28; 8:17; 9:28-29; 10:34-35; 12:34; 13:18; 15:25; 17:12; 19:24, 28, 36-37; 20:9). Also, cf. Ellis, Genius of John, 4-6; Evans, Word and glory, 184-86; Lincoln, John, 77-78; Whitacre, Johannine polemic, 1-2, 5-6, 10-11.

 

Elsewhere (ibid, 199), we read the following about the use of Zech 9:9 in John 12:14:


As the “Prince of Peace” (Isa. 9:6), the Messiah will one day bring peace and manifest God’s glory throughout creation—even to the heights of heaven (cf. Luke 19:38). This truth mirrors that the shepherds heard on the night of the Savior’s birth. They were greeted by a chorus of angels who gave glory to God and announced peace for all who received the Lord’s favor (cf. 2:14). John 12:14 quotes Zechariah 9:9 to reinforce the providential way in which Jesus as Torah was the realization of all that the Hebrew sacred writings foretold concerning the divine plan of redemption. John 12:16 notes that at first Jesus’ disciples did not grasp the deeper meaning of the incidents connected with the Redeemer’s triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Like the exuberant crowd, the disciples thought that Jesus was the Messiah; but also like them, they did not comprehend the true nature of His mission. After Jesus was raised into His glory, however, His disciples came to realize that the Old Testament messianic prophecies were about the Savior. They also began to recognize what they themselves had done for their Lord. (Dan Lioy, Jesus as Torah in John 1-12 [Eugene, Oreg.: Wipf and Stock, 2007], 199, emphasis in bold added)