Looking back from our day to that of Moses, our thoughts and opinions are inevitably affected by our knowledge of the New Testament. The unique position of Jesus in God’s plan of redemption makes it necessary to see all the recorded laws and happenings as dependent and conditional on the sacrifice upon the Cross. But even apart from this the example of the treatment of the Old Testament by the writers of the new sets not only a pattern of exposition, but a standard, too.
On the plane of behaviour and moral teaching we should expect both testaments to agree, and one of the happiest examples of this is found in Paul’s dual quotation in support of his instruction to Timothy to give double honour to an Elder who rules well (1 Tim. 5:17-18) : “The laborer is worthy of his hire” is a quotation from a Gospel (Luke 10:7), and “Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn” is from the Laws (Deut. 25:4).
From this example arises the question: Is the law to be looked at allegorically, seeing the oxen treading out the corn as Elders doing their ministry.
In his usage of the same quotation in dealing with the maintenance of preachers, Paul seems to reject the idea that the law was for the good of the oxen and to say categorically that it is written. for us (1 Cor. 9:9-11). This means that the application of the rule is not an end in itself but a means to teach us of God’s ways. As He provides for oxen so He provides for teachers. Similarly He provided for His priests (1 Cor. 9 :13- 14). These examples were used to demonstrate that Paul’s reasoning was not mere fallible human stuff but was in accord with that of God, as evidenced in His law.
Paul did have occasion to use allegory. Using law in its wider sense he takes the narrative of Sarah and Hagar as teaching a lesson that can only be fully appreciated by seeing it as an allegory, when the principles in the scene stand for people in similar relationship but on a different plane.
This raises a very large question as to how far the incidents recorded are to be regarded, not as mere records of events, but as allegories to be worked out to teach some lesson.
In skillful hands an allegory will vividly illustrate some principle of the ways of God, but in the hands of the crank it becomes a “proof” of some point that some reasonable minds cannot accept.
It is to Paul again that we owe the example of what can be done with simple narrative when he finds a parallel between the life of an Israelite in the Exodus and that of a Christian and unites the two by the mystic statement, “And that rock was Christ.” But having established the likeness, Paul goes on to draw out his lessons, so that the likeness should not go on too far. These examples he says were written for us (1 Cor. 10:1-11). It seems clear that what he is most concerned with is the applications of the same principles by the same God to similar people in similar circumstances.
Sometimes, however, the same principles operate on very different material to produce completely opposite results, and it needs some one with the perception of Paul to see the identity of principle in such diverse circumstances as the consequences of Adam’s disobedience and Christ’s obedience which enabled Him to refer to Adam as a figure of Christ.
It is easier for us to see the justification for applying the language of the Passover to Christ (1 Cor. 5:7), but to do so make us wonder how much, if any, of the ultimate significance the original recipients of the law were expected to understand. The Apostle put the same point in different words when he asked “Wherefore then serveth the law.” His answer usually conveys the wrong meaning because of our modern idea of a “schoolmaster” as a teacher whereas to the contemporaries of the Apostle the idea was more of a protecting guide. This is allies to the idea of being “shut up” oi kept in ward (Gal. 3:19-24). Else. where the Apostle wrote of the Law coming to emphasise man’ sinfulness and God’s abounding mercy (Rom. 5:20). Yet he recognised that the law was spiritual (Rom. 7:12-14).
We may therefore conclude that the Apostle recognised the role of the law as a preserver of the knowledge of the ways of God but not as a reveler of the person ability of the Saviour.
It was not necessary to under stand the types and shadows of the law in order to manifest faith like Abraham’s. How far the thoughtful Israelite saw the work of the promised Seed in the law of sacrifice we have no means 01 judging, but as we look back from our privileged position and find the many facets of the work 01 Jesus illustrated and exemplified in the law we must not be blind& by our knowledge and forget that we have with them of Moses’ common salvation dependent upon a similar faith in the same God who counted Abram’s faith as righteousness.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One