Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in
Question 4
Multiple early Christian writers quoted here (Tertullian, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Constantius) treat the law as having “come to an end” and its shadows “ceased to operate once he had come”; how does that early Christian assumption challenge common modern Christian attachments to Old Testament law-keeping, identity markers, or “biblical” cultural rules?
Another way to ask: Early Christian writers said the Old Testament law ended when Christ came. How does that challenge modern Christians who hold tightly to Old Testament law-keeping, identity labels, or “biblical” cultural rules?

Direct Answer The transcript’s early Christian voices strongly assume that the Mosaic system and its shadow-commands are no longer the basis for righteousness, because Christ fulfilled and concluded the law. That challenges modern attachments that treat Old Testament law-keeping or boundary markers as required pathways to being right with God.

Support from Transcript:

  • Bercot states plainly: “The law had ended with Christ. Jesus completed the law and brought it to fulfillment.”
  • Tertullian: Jews were “oblivious of His plan to bring about the fulfillment of the law through Christ,” and so they maintained their righteousness “in opposition to Christ.”
  • Theodoret: “Their unreasonable adherence to the law” is what Paul calls “their own righteousness,” since it “had now come to an end.”
  • Constantius: the sacrifices and other shadow-things “ceased to operate once he had come.”
  • Novatian: Christ “is the end of the law,” revealing and completing its mysteries (even mentioning clean/unclean categories).
Discussion Follow-ups Which modern “identity markers” function like proof of righteousness? How can we honor the Old Testament without treating its shadow-system as still operating?