Test 12: The Covenant System's Remedial Function
Central Questions Under Examination
- How did the ceremonial system address moral law violations?
- What was the relationship between animal sacrifices and actual forgiveness?
- How did the earthly sanctuary relate to the heavenly original?
- What transitioned at the cross versus what continued?
Argument 1: Against the Position that Animal Sacrifices Actually Removed Sin
The Alternative View
Mainstream Christianity often teaches that Old Testament sacrifices actually atoned for sin, providing real forgiveness, and that this system was replaced by Christ's sacrifice. This view holds that animal blood could cleanse sin under the old covenant, but Christ's blood is simply more effective under the new covenant.
Counter-Argument
This position directly contradicts Hebrews 10:4: "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins." The Greek construction here is absolute - οὐ ἀδύνατον (not possible). This isn't saying animal blood was less effective; it's declaring legal impossibility.
The biblical evidence establishes the IOU system: each sacrifice was a promissory note acknowledging debt and expressing faith in future payment. Consider the legal absurdity of the alternative position: if animal blood could actually remove sin, why would Christ need to die? Those holding this view cannot explain why God would subject His Son to crucifixion if a lamb could accomplish the same legal result.
Furthermore, if animal sacrifices truly removed sin, then between Sinai and Calvary, over one million morning and evening sacrifices alone would have created millions of completely forgiven sins. Yet Hebrews 10:3 states: "But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year." The word "remembrance" (ἀνάμνησις) means bringing back to mind what exists. You don't remember what has been eliminated.
The Abraham-Isaac narrative in Genesis 22 establishes the pattern: the ram was a substitute pointing forward, not the actual solution. Abraham "saw Christ's day" (John 8:56), not the ram's day. The location - Mount Moriah, where the temple would later stand (2 Chronicles 3:1) - connects the entire sacrificial system to this prophetic event pointing to Christ.
Legal Precedent from Tests 1-11
As established in Test 2, the universal impact of sin proves universal moral law. If animal blood could remove sin, it could only remove violations of ceremonial law, not moral law that existed from creation. But sin existed before ceremonial law (Test 3 proved pre-Mosaic judgments), therefore the sin problem transcends what animal blood could address even if it had cleansing power.
Argument 2: Against the Position that Old and New Testament Saints Were Saved Differently
The Alternative View
Dispensational theology teaches that God had different salvation plans for different eras - law for Israel, grace for the church. Old Testament saints were allegedly saved by law-keeping plus sacrifices, while New Testament believers are saved by grace alone.
The Defense's Counter-Argument
The biblical text explicitly addresses this error in Galatians 3:8: "The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham." The gospel - salvation by grace through faith - was preached to Abraham approximately 2000 years before Christ.
The legal impossibility of the alternative view becomes evident when examining Romans 3:20: "Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin." Paul uses future tense but speaks universally - "no flesh" includes all humanity throughout all time. If Old Testament saints could be justified by law-keeping, Paul's statement is false.
Consider Abel, the first martyr. Hebrews 11:4 states: "By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous." Not by the sacrifice itself, but "by faith" he was declared righteous. The sacrifice was the expression of faith, not the basis of righteousness.
The evidence demonstrates that Old Testament believers were saved by Christ as effectively as modern believers. They looked forward to the cross through types and shadows; we look backward to the historical event. The object of faith - Christ - remains constant throughout all dispensations.
Cross-Reference Evidence
Romans 4:3 states Abraham "believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness" - 430 years before the law. If Abraham was justified by faith before the law existed, how could salvation be by law-keeping after the law was given? Did God provide a superior salvation method (faith) before the law, then downgrade to an inferior method (works) at Sinai? The logical absurdity is evident.
Argument 3: Against the Position that the Moral Law Was Nailed to the Cross
The Alternative View
Many Christians claim Colossians 2:14's "handwriting of ordinances" refers to the Ten Commandments, which were allegedly abolished at the cross. They argue Christians are free from all Old Testament law, including the Sabbath.
The Defense's Counter-Argument
The biblical text establishes the critical distinction between two laws through physical characteristics alone:
The Two Laws Distinguished
- Moral Law: Written by God's finger (Exodus 31:18), on stone, inside the ark
- Ceremonial Law: Written by Moses (Deuteronomy 31:9), in a book, beside the ark
Colossians 2:14 uses χειρόγραφον (cheirographon) - a Greek commercial term for a certificate of debt, never used in the Septuagint for the Ten Commandments. Modern translations confirm:
- "certificate of debt" (NASB)
- "record of debt" (ESV)
- "written code with its regulations" (NIV)
The logical test: if the moral law was abolished, why did Christ die? You don't pay penalties for abolished laws. A president pardoning a criminal doesn't abolish the law violated; it acknowledges the law while providing mercy. Christ's death validates the law's continuing authority.
Furthermore, the same Paul who wrote Colossians also wrote Romans 3:31: "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." The Greek word καταργέω (make void) means to render entirely useless. Paul emphatically denies faith renders the law useless.
Argument 4: Against the Position that the Earthly Sanctuary Was the Ultimate Reality
The Alternative View
Some Christian traditions teach the earthly sanctuary was the complete system, fully effective in its time, which ended entirely at the cross with no continuing heavenly ministry.
The Defense's Counter-Argument
Hebrews 8:5 explicitly states the earthly priests "serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount."
The earthly was copied from a pre-existing heavenly original. Hebrews 8:1-2 confirms: "We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man."
The biblical evidence shows Christ didn't end sanctuary service but relocated it. He "ever liveth to make intercession" (Hebrews 7:25) in the "greater and more perfect tabernacle" (Hebrews 9:11). The earthly sanctuary's destruction in AD 70 didn't end the ministry but confirmed its transfer to heaven where it continues today.
Critical Understanding
Critical to understanding this transition: the dead saints don't immediately enter heaven but "sleep" awaiting resurrection (1 Thessalonians 4:13-16, Daniel 12:2, John 5:28-29). However, there is a crucial distinction between two groups: Old Testament saints who died before Calvary died with their IOUs marked "to be paid by Christ's future work," looking forward in faith to the promised sacrifice. Those who die in Christ after Calvary die with their IOUs marked "paid by Christ's completed work," looking backward in faith to the historical sacrifice. Yet both groups share the same condition - they rest unconsciously in their graves until "the last trump" when "the dead shall be raised incorruptible" (1 Corinthians 15:52). This reinforces that the ceremonial system was promissory for those before the cross - even death didn't grant immediate access to the benefits, which await the resurrection. Even after the cross, death still doesn't grant immediate heaven, but those who die in Christ have their accounts marked "paid in full" rather than "awaiting payment." (Note: A fuller examination of the state of the dead and what happens at death will be addressed in upcoming legal test analysis.)
Argument 5: Against the Position that the Sabbath is Ceremonial
The Alternative View
Most Christianity claims the Sabbath, though part of the Ten Commandments, was ceremonial and temporary, unlike the other nine commandments which are moral and permanent.
The Defense's Counter-Argument
This position requires God to have written ceremonial law with His finger on stone and placed it inside the ark - actions He never took for any actual ceremonial law. As established in Tests 1 and 4, the Sabbath was "sanctified" at creation (Genesis 2:3), before sin, before any need for ceremonial redemptive types.
The biblical evidence from Leviticus 23:38 is decisive: the ceremonial feast sabbaths are "beside the sabbaths of the LORD." The ceremonial sabbaths were in addition to, not including, the weekly Sabbath. They were distinct categories.
Mark 2:27 records Christ's words: "The sabbath was made for man" - ἄνθρωπος (anthropos), meaning humanity, not just Jews. When was it made for man? At man's creation, before Jews existed, before sin required ceremonial remedies.
The Logical Test
If nine commandments are moral and one is ceremonial, what distinguishes the Sabbath? It shares every characteristic of moral law:
- Written by God's finger
- On stone (permanence)
- Inside the ark (most holy)
- Points to God as Creator (moral relationship)
- Existed before sin (not remedial)
Argument 6: The Educational Purpose of the System
The Salvation Education Process
The biblical evidence reveals that the entire Old Testament system was educational, teaching salvation truths through object lessons. Every lamb pointed to "the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). Every priestly mediation taught about Christ's heavenly ministry. Every feast revealed aspects of the plan of salvation.
This educational purpose explains why God instituted elaborate ceremonies that couldn't actually save - they were teaching tools. The alternative view that they actually saved makes God a poor teacher, replacing ineffective animal blood with effective human blood, rather than revealing that only divine blood could pay sin's penalty.
Conclusion: What Has Been Legally Established
The evidence from Scripture, cross-referenced with biblical testimony and building on Tests 1-11, establishes:
- Animal sacrifices never removed sin - they were IOUs awaiting Christ's payment
- Salvation has always been by grace through faith - Old Testament saints looked forward to the cross
- The moral law remains binding - Christ's death validates rather than abolishes it
- The heavenly sanctuary continues - Christ ministers there now
- The Sabbath is moral law - established at creation, written by God, permanent as stone
The alternative positions create logical impossibilities and biblical contradictions that cannot withstand legal scrutiny. The covenant system's remedial function addressed moral law violations through promise and type, not through actual payment until Christ. This system educated humanity about salvation while maintaining the moral law's authority - including the Sabbath - which continues unchanged today.