A PRAGMATIC VIEW · BIBLICAL TEXT · THEOLOGY · HISTORY · SCHOLARLY SOURCES · NO CONCLUSION IMPOSED
Every serious position on this question falls into one of these three camps
The key passages used by all three sides, with their standard interpretations
Matthew 5:17–18 read literally: the Law doesn't disappear until "everything is accomplished." Covenant theologians argue that "until everything is accomplished" refers to the end of history — not to the cross. On this reading, the Old Testament law is still in force. Reformed scholars at Ligonier Ministries and Westminster Seminary use this passage as their primary proof text for the Moral Law's abiding authority.
Matthew 5:19 explicitly warns against setting aside "the least of these commands." Jesus goes on to say: "Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven." Covenant theologians read this as a direct affirmation that Old Testament commands remain authoritative under Jesus' teaching.
Romans 3:31 — Paul says faith "establishes" the law, not abolishes it. "Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law." (Romans 3:31) Covenant theologians argue Paul is saying that justification by faith doesn't make the law irrelevant — it actually puts it on its proper footing as a guide for Christian living, not a means of salvation.
2 Timothy 3:16–17 says ALL scripture is "God-breathed and useful for teaching." "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness." Written when "Scripture" meant only the Old Testament, this verse is used to argue that the entire OT retains authority for Christian instruction and moral formation.
Jesus quotes, affirms, and intensifies OT commands throughout the Gospels. In the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5–7), Jesus repeatedly quotes the OT law and intensifies its moral demands — "You have heard it said... but I say to you." Covenant theologians read this as Jesus deepening the law, not replacing it. He never says "ignore what Moses said."
Matthew 5:17 — "fulfill" (plēroō) means to complete and thereby supersede, not merely to obey. Greek scholar Robert Banks and others argue that plēroō in Matthew 5:17 does not mean "uphold" but "bring to its intended goal" — which means the law's purpose is now complete in Christ and transcended by him. The Gospel Coalition's own journal acknowledges this reading is "controversial but grammatically defensible."
Hebrews 8:13 — the author explicitly calls the first covenant "obsolete." "By calling this covenant 'new,' he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear." (Hebrews 8:13) The GCI Archive analysis notes this is a "large category" declaration — it is the covenant itself that is obsolete, not just individual ceremonies. New Covenant and Dispensational scholars cite this as decisive.
Galatians 3:23–25 — Paul calls the law a temporary "guardian" until Christ arrived. "Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian." This is among the most-cited passages for NT primacy. The tense is unambiguous: the law's guardianship role is past.
Acts 15 — the Jerusalem Council explicitly ruled Gentiles do NOT have to obey the Law of Moses. The first church council, held in Jerusalem circa 49 CE, addressed precisely this question. "Some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, 'The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses.'" The council, led by James and Peter, rejected this position. Gentile Christians needed only to abstain from food offered to idols, blood, strangled animals, and sexual immorality.
Galatians 5:1–3 — Paul warns that accepting circumcision means being "obligated to obey the whole law." "It is for freedom that Christ has set us free... I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law." Paul presents it as binary: you're either under the whole Mosaic system or you're not. You can't cherry-pick.
Most Protestant Christians use a ceremonial/civil/moral distinction. Scholars disagree on whether this is valid.
Dietary laws explicitly cancelled in Acts 10:9–15 and Colossians 2:16. In Acts 10, Peter receives a vision in which God commands him to eat animals previously declared unclean, saying "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean." Colossians 2:16 states: "Do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day." Nearly all Protestant traditions agree ceremonial food laws are abolished.
Animal sacrifice system abolished by Hebrews 10:1–18. The entire sacrificial system of Leviticus is explicitly superseded by Hebrews 10: "The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming — not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship." The author argues Christ's single sacrifice permanently replaces the entire sacrificial system.
Festival observance and Sabbath explicitly made non-binding in Colossians 2:16–17. Paul writes that no one should judge Christians "with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ." This is one of the clearest direct statements in the NT that ceremonial observances are no longer obligatory.
Civil law was given to Israel as a theocratic nation-state — Christians are not a nation-state. Reformed theologians argue that the civil laws (stoning adulterers, rules for warfare, property law, etc.) were given to ancient Israel functioning as a theocracy with God as king. Since Christians do not form a national theocracy, those civil laws were never intended to apply to Gentile believers in any age. The Westminster Confession (1646) explicitly states the "judicial laws" are "expired."
Ephesians 2:15 — Paul says Christ "abolished in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations." "For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations." GCI Archive analysis notes this refers to the laws that separated Jew from Gentile — which covers most of the civil and ceremonial code.
No Christian tradition in 2,000 years has executed blasphemers, adulterers, or Sabbath-breakers as Leviticus demands. The OT civil code prescribes death for adultery (Lev. 20:10), blasphemy (Lev. 24:16), Sabbath-breaking (Num. 15:32–36), and disobeying parents (Deut. 21:18–21). No mainstream Christian tradition has applied these literally since the Constantinian era — suggesting universal de facto acceptance that civil law is non-binding, even where theology differs.
The three-category distinction (ceremonial/civil/moral) is not found in the Bible itself. Dispensationalists argue this is the fatal flaw in Covenant Theology's position. No ancient Israelite understood a "three-fold law." It was always "the Law of Moses" — one unified covenant. Multnomah University theologian Wayne Strickland argues the categories are a post-hoc rationalization to explain why Christians follow some laws and not others.
Westminster Confession (1646) — the most influential Protestant confession — keeps the moral law binding. Article XIX of the Westminster Confession states: "The moral law doth for ever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof." It explicitly defines moral law as the Ten Commandments. This position is authoritative for all Reformed, Presbyterian, and many Baptist denominations globally.
New Covenant Theology: moral laws in the NT are binding — but because the NT says so, not the OT. NCT's middle position holds that laws like "do not murder" remain in force for Christians — but their authority comes from being re-stated in the New Testament, not from carrying over from Moses. This avoids the three-category problem: Christians follow NT ethics that happen to overlap with OT moral law, but are not "under the Law" as a system.
The words of Jesus are the primary source — and they point in multiple directions
"Not the smallest letter will pass from the Law until all is accomplished." (Matt 5:18) Jesus uses the language of iota and keraia — the smallest Hebrew letter and a decorative pen stroke — to emphasize the complete permanence of the Law. Crossway and Ligonier theologians argue this is as emphatic a statement of the Law's authority as the New Testament contains.
Jesus quotes the Shema (Deut. 6:4–5) as the "greatest commandment" without modifying it. When asked which commandment is greatest, Jesus quotes directly from Deuteronomy: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." He does not replace this with a new teaching — he calls it the foundation of "all the Law and the Prophets." This is a direct affirmation of OT authority.
In Luke 24:44, the risen Jesus calls himself the fulfillment of Moses, Psalms, and Prophets — not their replacement. "Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms." Jesus treats all three divisions of the Hebrew Bible as pointing to him — which implies their ongoing authority as witnesses to his identity, not as abolished documents.
Jesus intensifies the moral law in the Sermon on the Mount — anger equals murder, lust equals adultery. Far from weakening the OT moral law, Jesus makes it stricter: "You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'You shall not murder'... But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment." Covenant theologians read this as Jesus applying the law more deeply, not abolishing it.
Jesus declares all foods "clean" — directly overriding Mosaic dietary law. (Mark 7:19) "For it doesn't go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body." Mark adds the editorial note: "In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean." This is one of the most explicit cases in the Gospels of Jesus directly overriding an OT law — not fulfilling it, not intensifying it, but cancelling it.
Jesus gives a "new commandment" — not one from Moses. (John 13:34) "A new commandment I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another." The word "new" (kainos in Greek) carries the sense of qualitatively new — a different kind. This is not a restatement of Leviticus 19:18; it is grounded in Jesus' own self-giving love as the standard, which is a new foundation.
Jesus rejects the Mosaic divorce law, saying Moses allowed it only "because your hearts were hard." (Matt 19:8) When challenged on divorce, Jesus does not uphold the Mosaic permission (Deut. 24:1). Instead he says Moses allowed it as a concession to human weakness, and points back to creation as the higher standard. This implies Jesus has the authority to correct Moses — not merely interpret him.
The "this cup is the new covenant in my blood" language at the Last Supper explicitly inaugurates a NEW covenant. Jesus says at the Last Supper: "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you." (Luke 22:20) The language consciously echoes Jeremiah 31:31's promise of a "new covenant" to replace the old one. If a new covenant is inaugurated, the old one's terms are formally superseded.
Paul's letters contain the most detailed NT theology of law — and some of the most contested passages
Romans 7:12 — "The law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good." Paul explicitly defends the goodness of the Mosaic law even as he argues Christians are not justified by it. Covenant theologians read this as Paul affirming the law's continued relevance as a guide to righteousness and a mirror of God's character — even in the new covenant age.
1 Corinthians 7:19 — "Keeping God's commands is what counts." Paul writes: "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts." He dismisses circumcision (a ceremonial law) but explicitly affirms that keeping God's commands matters. Reformed scholars argue "God's commands" here implicitly includes the moral law as its core content.
Romans 13:8–10 — Paul says love "fulfills the law," citing multiple OT commandments. "The commandments, 'You shall not commit adultery,' 'You shall not murder,' 'You shall not steal,' 'You shall not covet,' and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' Love is the fulfillment of the law." Paul's ethics are built directly from OT commandments — he doesn't replace them, he distills them.
Galatians 2:16 — "a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ." Paul's most direct statement of justification by faith alone: "Know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified." Dispensationalists read this as freedom from the Mosaic system entirely.
Romans 6:14 — "You are not under the law, but under grace." Paul writes plainly: "For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace." Dispensationalists and NCT scholars argue the phrase "under the law" describes the Mosaic covenant as a system — and Christians are unambiguously not under that system. This is read as one of Paul's clearest statements of NT primacy.
1 Corinthians 9:20–21 — Paul himself lived "not under the law" as a personal practice. Paul writes: "To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law." Paul explicitly describes himself as personally not under the Mosaic law — even while using it strategically in Jewish contexts. GCI Archive cites this as evidence that even Paul's own lifestyle was NT-only.
Colossians 2:13–14 — God "cancelled the charge of our legal indebtedness" and "nailed it to the cross." "He forgave us all our sins, having cancelled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross." Dispensationalists argue this refers to the entire legal framework of the Mosaic covenant, which was literally cancelled at the crucifixion.
Hebrews makes the most systematic argument in the NT that the old covenant has been superseded
Hebrews treats the OT as prophetically pointing to Christ — it is not dismissed, it is fulfilled. The entire argument of Hebrews is that Jesus is superior to Moses, angels, the Levitical priesthood, and the Mosaic covenant — not that those things were wrong, but that they were always pointing toward something better. The OT is treated as authoritative scripture throughout Hebrews, cited extensively and with reverence.
Hebrews 4:9–10 explicitly maintains Sabbath rest as a continuing Christian reality. "There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from their works, just as God did from his." Covenant theologians use this to argue that Sabbath principles carry into the New Covenant age — though the form (Sunday worship) differs from the old (Saturday rest).
Hebrews 8:6 — Jesus' ministry is "superior" because it is "established on better promises." "But in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises." The Assemblies of God News analysis notes: if the new covenant is superior with better promises, the laws of the old covenant are correspondingly inferior — which implies they are superseded.
Hebrews 8:13 — the old covenant is explicitly called "obsolete." "By calling this covenant 'new,' he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear." The GCI Archive notes this is not a narrow reference to the priesthood — "the conclusion is more broadly stated — it is the covenant itself that is obsolete." The entire Sinai-Moses covenant has been replaced. Its laws derive authority from the covenant; if the covenant is obsolete, so are its laws as a binding system.
Hebrews 10:9 — Christ comes to "set aside the first" and "establish the second." "He sets aside the first to establish the second." The author of Hebrews uses strong language — "set aside," "changed," "abrogated," "abolished" — throughout chapters 7–10, describing what happens to Mosaic laws under the new covenant. GCI Archive: "Hebrews uses strong terms: laws are set aside, changed, abrogated, abolished, because one covenant has ended and another has begun."
Hebrews 7:18–19 — "the former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless." "The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God." The Levitical law system — including the priesthood and its associated laws — is described not just as superseded but as "weak and useless" for its core salvific purpose.
These are the actual issues where the theology of law makes a concrete difference
Sunday worship replacing Saturday Sabbath — most traditions assume OT Sabbath principle carries over. Most Christian traditions worship on Sunday, applying the OT Sabbath principle to the "Lord's Day" — despite no NT verse explicitly commanding Sunday worship. This is arguably the most widespread practical application of Covenant Theology's position that moral principles from the OT carry forward in new forms.
Tithing (10% giving) is derived from OT law with no NT equivalent mandate. The tithe — giving 10% to the religious community — is extensively commanded in the OT (Leviticus 27:30, Numbers 18:26, Deuteronomy 14:22). The NT does not specify a percentage. Many churches teach tithing as obligatory using OT texts. Whether this is legitimate depends entirely on whether OT law carries into the new covenant.
Capital punishment — often defended on OT grounds (Genesis 9:6, Numbers 35). Many Christian traditions that support capital punishment cite the OT — especially Genesis 9:6 ("Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed") — as its justification. If OT law has no authority for Christians, this is a significantly weaker foundation.
Stoning adulterers — Leviticus 20:10 commands death for adultery. No Christian tradition does this. The Mosaic law explicitly commands death for adultery, homosexual acts (Lev. 20:13), blasphemy (Lev. 24:16), witchcraft (Lev. 20:27), and Sabbath-breaking (Numbers 15:32–36). The fact that no Christian tradition enforces any of these punishments is the Assemblies of God's primary argument against selective literalism: consistency requires a principled reason to ignore them.
Mixed fabrics, shellfish, round haircuts — Leviticus 19 commands are universally ignored. Leviticus 19 forbids wearing clothes woven of two kinds of material (v.19), eating shellfish, cutting the hair at the sides of your head (v.27), and getting tattoos (v.28). These are in the same chapter as "love your neighbor as yourself" (v.18). Every Christian tradition treats some of these as irrelevant. The question is how — and why — they decide which ones to ignore.
Slavery — both Old and New Testament permit it. Christian abolitionists had to argue AGAINST the plain text. The OT regulates (but does not forbid) slavery extensively. The NT instructs slaves to obey their masters (Ephesians 6:5, Colossians 3:22) without commanding abolition. The Christian abolition movement led by Wilberforce argued against the plain biblical text using broader theological principles — an implicit acknowledgment that some texts must be overridden by others.
Homosexuality — Leviticus 18:22 is OT law. Is it binding? The debate about same-sex relationships in Christianity hinges partly on this question. Leviticus 18:22 prohibits male same-sex intercourse. Whether that text retains authority for Christians depends directly on which framework you use: Covenant Theology says yes (moral law); Dispensationalism says authority rests in NT texts (Romans 1, 1 Cor 6) not the OT one; NCT says the same.
Women's roles — most restrictions derive from specific NT texts, not OT law. Contrary to popular assumption, most NT restrictions on women in ministry (1 Tim. 2:12, 1 Cor. 14:34) are NT texts, not OT. But their authority is debated on the same grounds — are they universal commands or culturally specific? The hermeneutical tools used to contextualize OT law are now applied to NT texts too, creating a parallel debate.
The Sabbath — the most significant practical division between Covenant and Dispensational theology. Seventh-day Adventists and some Covenant theologians insist Saturday Sabbath observance is binding under the moral law. Most Protestant evangelicals (Dispensational or NT-primacy) treat the Sabbath as fulfilled in Christ and worship on Sunday without strict rules. This is the single most concrete behavioral difference produced by the theological debate.
What the formal confessions and doctrinal standards of major traditions actually say
Reformed / Presbyterian — Westminster Confession (1646) is explicit: moral law binds all believers in all ages. Article XIX: "The moral law doth for ever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof." The Ten Commandments are treated as the summary of the moral law and are expected to guide Christian conduct, not as a means of salvation but as a guide to righteous living. This is the position of the PCA, OPC, and global Reformed churches.
Church of England — Article VII of the 39 Articles binds Christians to "moral commandments." Article VII (1563): "Although the Law given from God by Moses, as touching Ceremonies and Rites, do not bind Christian men, nor the Civil precepts thereof ought of necessity to be received in any commonwealth; yet notwithstanding, no Christian man whatsoever is free from the obedience of the Commandments which are called Moral." Binding for the Anglican Communion globally.
Methodist — Article VI of the 25 Articles mirrors the 39 Articles on moral law. The Methodist 25 Articles of Religion carry the same position as the 39 Articles: Christians are bound by the "commandments which are called moral." John Wesley himself maintained the preaching of the law as a necessary preparation for the gospel — a position that has shaped Methodist ethics globally.
Catholic — holds the Decalogue as binding natural moral law, not merely OT covenant law. The Catholic position grounds the Ten Commandments in natural law (knowable by reason) rather than purely in the Mosaic covenant. This means even if the covenant is superseded, the moral law remains — because it was never merely OT law to begin with. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (Part Three) organizes Christian ethics around the Ten Commandments.
Traditional Dispensationalism — entire Mosaic law belongs to the previous dispensation, not the church age. The Scofield Reference Bible (1909) made Dispensationalism mainstream in American evangelicalism. Multnomah's Wayne Strickland states the Dispensationalist view plainly: "The age of the church has rendered the law inoperative." The church is not Israel; the NT is the operating framework. Dallas Theological Seminary, Moody Bible Institute, and much of the Southern Baptist Convention lean this direction.
Andy Stanley (North Point) — "Irresistible" (2018) argues for formally "unhitching" from the OT. Pastor Andy Stanley, leading one of America's largest megachurches, published "Irresistible: Reclaiming the New That Jesus Unleashed for the World" in 2018, explicitly arguing that Christians should "unhitch" their faith from the OT. The book generated significant backlash from Reformed evangelicals, but its position reflects a widespread functional practice in American evangelical churches.
New Covenant Theology — the entire Mosaic system is fulfilled in Christ; NT ethics are authoritative. Tom Wells and Fred Zaspel's "New Covenant Theology" (2002) argues that the Mosaic covenant is gone as a binding system. NT ethics — which overlap with but are not derived from OT moral law — govern Christian conduct. This position is growing among Reformed Baptists and independent evangelicals who find Dispensationalism too discontinuous and Covenant Theology's three-fold law division unconvincing.
Seventh-Day Adventism — unique position: moral law (including Saturday Sabbath) fully binding; ceremonies abolished. SDAs hold a position closest to strict Covenant Theology, but apply it literally: the Saturday Sabbath is part of the moral law and remains binding. This makes them the only major tradition to consistently observe Saturday worship — based on the premise that if the moral law carries over, so does the fourth commandment without reinterpretation.