What is the difference between the ceremonial law, the moral law, and the judicial law in the Old Testament?

A word here as to the triple form the law took. First, there was the perfect standard of what man ought to be; secondly, the prohibition of what man was disposed to, a positive standard of what God required, and the prohibition of that to which man was inclined; and, as a third thing, an adjunct of certain ordinances and ceremonies "imposed until the time of reformation," Heb. 9:9-10. What did God do all this for? On the one hand, to demonstrate that man was not righteous; and, on the other, to point out One who (holy and righteous) should suffer "the just for the unjust."

God gave the Sinaitic law to His people Israel after their liberation from Egypt. With its juridical, ceremonial and moral commandments it was from the beginning meant for that people only (Deut. 4:8; Rom. 9:4), just as the Old Covenant was only made with Israel. Christians often overlook this fact.

The law of Sinai was a God-given system of claims on, and promises for, His earthly people. The moral laws were, so to speak, God's minimal claims on natural, unregenerate men. The ceremonial laws regulated the worship and service of the people and were at the same time a shadow of things to come which became reality in Christ (Col. 2:17; Heb. 10:1).

This law contained moral directions for the life of each Israelite, ceremonial directions (i.e. the laws of the offerings) for the children of Israel to serve God and also legal directions to regulate the daily life of the people. The principle of "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" belongs to the latter group. It is not a principle for the conscience of a particular individual but a legal direction for the authorities and judges of Israel. This is clear from Exodus 21:22 and Deuteronomy 19:18 where the judges are expressly mentioned. The direction was based on the principle of absolute fairness in requiting the deed and was to be a warning and deterrent to the people (Deut. 19:20).

God gave the Sinaitic law to His people Israel after their liberation from Egypt. With its juridical, ceremonial and moral commandments it was from the beginning meant for that people only (Deut. 4: 8; Rom. 9: 4), just as the Old Covenant was only made with Israel. Christians often overlook this fact.

The law of Sinai was a God-given system of claims on, and promises for, His earthly people. The moral laws were, so to speak, God's minimal claims on natural, unregenerate men. The ceremonial laws regulated the worship and service of the people and were at the same time a shadow of things to come which became reality in Christ (Col. 2: 17; Heb. 10: 1).

But why, it may be asked, were such terms proposed to Israel, when they had no strength to keep them? God saw that it would be good and wholesome for man to know the truth about himself, and the nature and extent of God's claims upon him; and for this end He gave the law. It was the perfect standard of what God required of man, of what man ought to be, and the prohibition of that to which he was strongly inclined. The ten commandments, for the most part, are like an interdict on the human will. "Thou shall not." … "Thou shalt not," is the stern, prohibitory voice of the moral law.

So in its measure is it with the law. It gives a true measure of what men ought to do, and, in its highest character, what they ought to feel, and claims direct authority for God over the conscience, and puts man, as far as claim on his conscience goes, under immediate responsibility to God and the consciousness of it. Hence it elevated the position of man immensely above the heathen who worshipped demons, and as helps to their passions, not God as a holy one for their conscience. Conscience could not be destroyed: God had put it in man by the fall, but it was buried as much as possible among the heathen, and religion helped through Satanic influence to do so.

This the law did away, and so far tended to present blessing; but if I be asked, What is the divine intention in the law, its spiritual purpose as judged of by the perfect light of the New Testament, in which man was looked at as an already lost sinner, and heavenly and eternal blessings are revealed? then I say that God's intention in the law was not and could not be temporal welfare of man by restraining evil. I may look at the whole law given to Israel in this light as a civil code incomparably beyond all that was known among heathens; but it has no such place, now Christianity is come. Farther, the law besides this contained a deeper element — its nucleus was the divine judgment of right and wrong in the creature. The ten commandments forbad the evils which destroyed the relationship between man and God and man and his neighbour. What the Lord drew out of the law is the essential element of blessedness even in heaven as far as the creature element of that happiness goes — loving God with all our heart, and our neighbour as ourselves. Next, in Israel's case, to whom the law was given, there was by the law no revelation at all of another world or its blessings; and so far as Israel was concerned, the law was given for temporal blessings — blessings in basket and in store, in the field and in the winepress; and these as signs of divine favour shewing its governmental approval of righteousness and obedience.

19 But it is the great mistake, as to the reasoning of the Apostle Paul, or the Christian's relationship to law, to make the difference which is attempted to be made between moral and ceremonial commandments. There is a difference assuredly. What natural conscience condemns as wrong makes guilt, if done without a law; a ceremony does not, as is evident. But the apostle goes much deeper into the question, and shews the effect of all law as a principle of relationship when a sinner is concerned in it. Hence he mingles up moral and ceremonial all together, not as indifferent to the distinction (for he is not), but as treating another question; using the law to convict of sin and kill the soul when it is looked at morally, and is known spiritually, and delivering from it as so known, by death and resurrection; and shewing that it puts man, if applied after redemption, under a fatal responsibility. It is a system, viewed as a whole, of which circumcision was the initiatory pledge, and man must do all or be cursed; for such were the terms of the law. Law, according to the reasoning of the apostle, was a distinct and definite dispensation of God, according to which life was promised consequent on obedience, and had its whole nature from this — a righteousness characterized by this principle; obedience first, then life therein — righteousness.

But there is more yet in connection with this. Look at the 12th verse. It is very radical: "For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law." Under the Levitical priesthood the people received the law. Mark, it does not mean the law of the priesthood merely. You would have to rend the books of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers to pieces in order to get the law of the priesthood separate from the other law. Israel's law was a unit; it was one and indivisible. The Ten Commandments summarized it, and all that followed them was simply the unfolding, enlarging and application of that law. Sometimes people make a distinction between the moral and ceremonial law. They say, We know the ceremonial law has been abrogated, but we are under the law of the Ten Commandments. I ask, Where will you find any such cleavage? When you come to the Old Testament, where will you find that the Ten Commandments are holier than the rest of the word of God? Enshrined in the Ten Commandments is one — the fourth — which is a ceremonial one. It is as though God would show that the moral and ceremonial are bound together as one in His mind. Whatever He declares has to be obeyed, whether it is, "Thou shalt not kill," or, "Thou shalt bring a tithe of all thou hast." I quite admit there are certain eternal principles unfolded in these commandments which abide always, things that are connected with the very character of God; but that is not raised in the question of the law. Law is law, whatever the enactment may be, and you cannot pick and choose amongst the laws of God any more than you could pick and choose amongst the Ten Commandments. You can no more say, I will keep the moral law and neglect the ceremonial, than you can say, I will keep the law which says, "Thou shalt not kill," and neglect the one which says, "Thou shalt not steal."

The law was like a straight edge given by God to make manifest the crookedness of man. "[The] law entered that the offence might abound " (Rom. 5:20), that is, not to increase sin, but to show its offensiveness, and to bring it home to the soul. "By [the] law is the knowledge of sin." Rom. 3:20. The apostle said that he would not have known lust had not the law said, "Thou shalt not covet." Rom. 7:7. The object of the law therefore was to evince the heinousness of sin, while it was a test of the obedience of man to God. It was given to Israel only, the one nation which was under God's special dealings, and in which He was trying man in the flesh. The heading of the ten commandments is "I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage," and this could apply only to the Israelites. Again, God says, "You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities." Amos 3:2. The Gentiles are described as not having the law, Rom. 2:14, though they had the work of the law written in their hearts, and a conscience which bore witness when they did wrong. As the Gentiles became associated with Israel, and heard what God required morally of man, they doubtless became more or less responsible according to the light received. But greater light having come in, the Galatian Christians are sharply rebuked for putting themselves under law, where, as Gentiles, they never had been. Some things forbidden in the law were wrong intrinsically, such as theft, murder, etc.; but other things were wrong only because God had forbidden them, such as the command to abstain from eating certain creatures called 'unclean.'

In this chapter we have various "judgments" or "fixed ordinances" recorded, the observance of which is enjoined upon the people as regulating their conduct in all their relationships with each other, and as befitting those who are in covenant relationship with God. The penalties attaching to any breach in the strict observance of these is demonstrably consistent with the character and principle of that relationship, which was law.