An Intro 2 - Exodus 21

There are a few more points that the IM makes about the Law of Moses (the 600+ rules that governed the Hebrew way of life anciently). The first point is that, as a preparatory gospel, all facets point to Christ. The IM notes, “when you study the law of Moses you can expect to find (1) a witness of Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice and (2) gospel principles illustrated in the laws given.” It goes on to say that even though these same rules aren’t required of disciples today, the purpose and principles are the same. For instance, the IM notes that anciently animal sacrifices were required but then when Christ came, he fulfilled that requirement and instituted the sacrament instead.

The IM says, “the practice of blood sacrifice was fulfilled when Jesus came and the tokens of the sacrament were given in place of the old law. But the principle was as true when the tokens were animals offered on the altar as it is now when the tokens are bread and water blessed by the priesthood. The eternal principle is that only in the partaking of the Lamb’s atoning sacrifice are we able to overcome and receive a forgiveness for our sins.”

I like looking at the gospel throughout time and seeing the ways that the teachings and practices are both the same and different. I don’t have a lot about ancient peoples and the way that God has tried to institute the gospel throughout time, and I’m sure that I will be surprised to learn just how hands on He was in trying to teach people the gospel throughout time. It will be interesting to see.

Secondly, both TB and the IM make a point in noting that this portion of the Torah with the law is about case law. These are legal statements beyond just stating what the laws are, they are for court proceedings. This might help explain just how prolific the laws are but also help us understand how the people lived under such strict requirements. Maybe they didn’t, maybe in practice everything looked a lot different. The IM says, “the major portion of the law if case law, i.e., the illustration of the basic principles in terms of specific cases. These specific cases are often illustrations of the extent of the application of the law; that if, by citing a minimal type of case, the necessary jurisdictions of the law are revealed.” I guess it would be like if someone 3,000 years in the future came across our courts legal briefs and had to deduce from that information just how rigidly our society obeyed all the cases and the precedence discussed over the years.

Finally, the IM brings up a very interesting point that the vast majority of the laws and in fact 8 of the 10 commandments are “negative,” meaning that they are what not to do instead of what we should do. The point that the IM makes that is interesting is that “a negative concept of law insures liberty.” I was surprised by this statement but as it explains more it makes sense. The IM explains, “except for the prohibited areas, all of man’s life is beyond the law, and the law is of necessity indifferent to it. If the commandment says, ‘You shalt not steal,’ it means that the law can only govern theft: it cannot govern or control honestly acquired property. When the law prohibits blasphemy and false witness, it guarantees that all other forms of speech have their liberty. The negativity of the law is the preservation of the positive life and freedom of man.” I had never considered that before, but it makes sense.