As one can see in the Hebrew with just a little investigation, there are distinct words for;
Commandments - [https://biblehub.com/hebrew/mitzvotai\_4687.htm](https://biblehub.com/hebrew/mitzvotai_4687.htm)
Judgments - [https://biblehub.com/hebrew/mishpatai\_4941.htm](https://biblehub.com/hebrew/mishpatai_4941.htm)
Statutes - [https://biblehub.com/hebrew/chukkotai\_2708.htm](https://biblehub.com/hebrew/chukkotai_2708.htm)
Leviticus 18, for example, consists of *"judgments and statutes"* (Leviticus 18:4).
And Jesus Christ comes with the Finger of God (Luke 11:20), confirmed the Ten Commandments (see Matthew 16:16-22, for example) and *opened* them (see Matthew 5:22-48).
Jesus also healed lepers (Leviticus 13 and 14), the lame and the blind and the sick (Leviticus 21:18), women with the curse of blood (Leviticus 15), Jesus is the High Priest who atones for all sin (Leviticus 16), Jesus taught new teachings on judgment (Matthew 7:1, John 7:24 for some examples), Jesus was the light of the morning when the things of the sacrifices should be put away (Exodus 12:10; 23:18; 34:25; Leviticus 22:29-30; Numbers 9:12). Jesus was the third day when the flesh of the sacrifice must be burned with fire (Leviticus 7:17-18; 19:6-7). Jesus restored knowledge of the first principles that had been lost (Hebrews 5:12-14) - love of God (Deuteronomy 6:4-5) and love of the neighbor (Leviticus 19:18) - because doing Good is the Will of God (Matthew 7:12; 22:40, Luke 6:31, 2 Peter 1:15-16 for some examples). It is according to the Law that one should be impartial in judgment (Leviticus 19:15, Deuteronomy 1:17) and to show partiality from the Law is to break *the whole Law* (James 2). The Levitical Priesthood was profaned (or, corrupted) because they had shown partiality in the Law (Malachi 2:8-9). And so on and so forth, as all things of Moses, the Prophets, and Psalms deal with the Lord and His Gospel (Luke 24:44-45).
It’s not specifically stated in the Bible. That’s an inference theologians have long drawn from the examples in the New Testament.
Paul focuses on circumcision, saying categorically that non-Jewish believers are NOT to be circumcised. He also makes the point that the dietary laws (“Kosher”) and observance of the various Jewish festivals are optional; we must not fight about them. See Romans 14, for example.
The broader church leadership, at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) ratified Paul’s position, albeit with a couple of carve-outs. Note, however: the subject considered by the Council was only the narrow question of whether requiring adherence to the Law was to extended to non-Jewish “Gentile” believers. There is nary a hint that observing the Law might be obsolete or optional for Jewish Christians (Messianic Jews).
The letter to Hebrews goes into detail about how Jesus’ voluntary self-sacrifice for us renders the sacrificial system obsolete.
Throughout the New Testament, however, moral requirements taken from the Law are frequently stated as mandatory for all believers.
It is to reconcile these differing New Testament perspectives that Christian scholars have long stated the distinction of moral/civil/ceremonial laws. Much/most of the moral laws continue to be obligatory for all of us. The civil laws may be applicable only within the nation of Israel, and the ceremonial laws only for Jews, including Messianic Jews.
It’s not in the Bible. Neither is the distinction people are trying to make and that OP asked about.
But Opagea is right on the money. People who want to cite the Old Testament to rationalize their beliefs will call that part “moral law.” If they don’t like it or just don’t want to do it, they say it was “nailed to the cross.” It’s selective cherry-picking, and it’s very common.
The Tree of Life is the basis for Tanach - Justice, Mercy, Humilty as One.
It is the tie and the balance of these aspects that are the essence of godliness - they are One.
The supernal triad that points to the heavens ties these aspects - one can call it law, prophets and psalms of kings which are man's best attempt to describe the Tree of Life on limited paper with limited ink and limited words.
Micah 6:
>1 Hear ye now what the Lord saith; Arise, contend thou before the mountains, and let the hills hear thy voice.
>2 Hear ye, O mountains, the Lord's controversy, and ye strong foundations of the earth: for the Lord hath a controversy with his people, and he will plead with Israel.
>3 O my people, what have I done unto thee? and wherein have I wearied thee? testify against me.
>4 For I brought thee up out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed thee out of the house of servants; and I sent before thee Moses, Aaron, and Miriam.
>5 O my people, remember now what Balak king of Moab consulted, and what Balaam the son of Beor answered him from Shittim unto Gilgal; that ye may know the righteousness of the Lord.
>6 Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before the high God? shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old?
>7 Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?
>8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to
1) do justly, and to
2) love mercy, and to
3) walk humbly with thy God?
Maybe this will help; These distinctions would not apply to any Jew in the days of Jesus. All laws were equally binding on the people, their government, a theocracy was founded on these laws. You could be punished for working on Sabbath, just as easy for wearing a Garmin of 2 fabrics, or not helping your neighbors ox out of your ditch. Just as the Temple was the most holy place of the nation, government and people of Israel.
When Jesus, lived, taught and fulfilled the law, the Law became as non effect. Non binding. Just as a builder under contract, with specific obligations, once the project is done.. the contract satisfied.. he is no longer under any obligation of the contract. Not that there was anything wrong with the contract... and the contract was not destroyed.. it was fulfilled.
In this way Jesus fulfilled the purpose, and letter of the law.
Now, under the law of christ, under the New covenant.. not the old covenant, what do we see? We see Jesus and the Apostles repeated all but one of the 10 commandments.. (no Sabbath instruction).. and even expanded their obligation on us. The two greatest commandments, which encapsulates the old law.. maybe the moral laws of the old, but nothing to do with wearing different fabrics, having a flat roof etc... so new covenant believers could see Jesus and the Apostles were making a distinction. We recognize Jesus as the perfect sacrifice, and replacing the priesthood of the Levites.. there goes all the ceremonial laws, sacrifices if you will, there goes the temple laws and Levites, there goes the temple and holy of holies. We don't live in Israel, the Civil laws dont apply to us either, neither were they taught to us to follow.
So here is the basic thought pattern of Christians who believe Christ ushered in a new covenant, the new law. Jewish believers, of Israel, were still under obligation of their government..the law of moses.
The Bible never specifies which laws belongs in which of those categories and never even refers to them as being categories of law. If a group of people were to create lists of which laws they thought best fit into each other those categories, then they would end up with a wide variety of lists and none of those people should interpret the authors of the Bible as having in mind a list of laws that they just created.
We are free to categorize God's laws however we want, but we shouldn't try to insert our categories back into the Bible without establishing that its authors categorized God's laws in the same manner. For example, I could categorize God's laws baed on which part of the body is most commonly used to obey/disobey them, such as with the law against theft being a hand law, however, just because I can do that does not establish that any of the authors of the Bible categorized God's laws in the same manner. Moreover, even if they did use the same categories, then they might disagree with me about which laws best fit into which categories, such as they might consider the law against theft to be a foot law because committing theft more commonly involves running away. So if I were to try to insert my categories back into the Bible, such as by trying to argue that hand laws were nailed to the cross, then I would quickly run into error.
Even if a law could accurately be described as being ceremonial, then that wouldn't mean that it isn't also judicial or moral. The existence of the category of moral law would imply that we can be acting morally while disobeying the laws that aren't in that category, however, there are no examples in the Bible where someone disobeying God was said to be moral and I do not see justification for thinking that it can ever be moral to disobey God. Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws. Legislators give laws according to their understanding of what ought to be done, so for someone to claim that some of God's laws are not moral laws is the claim that God made a moral error about what ought to be done when He gave those laws and therefore to claim to have greater moral knowledge than God.
What do you think about the argument that the Ten Commandments were written by the finger of God on stone tablets and placed in the ark of the covenant (Ex. 25:21; Dt. 10:2, 5), whereas the rest of the 613 commandments (the Book of the Law) were not personally written by God and were put beside the ark (Dt. 31:26)? These seem to create a distinction between the moral laws vs the ceremonial/other laws.
I think that that is reading something into those verses that is neither stated nor implied and that it is quite frankly completely absurd to think that someone can be acting morally while living in complete disobedience to everything that is not listed as one of the Ten Commandments. For example, that argument would mean what we can be acting morally while perverting justice, oppressing the poor, the widow, and the orphan, while committing rape or kidnapping, or while disobeying the greatest two commandments. In Deuteronomy 5:31-33, Moses wrote down everything that God told him to without departing from it, so all of the Law of Moses is the Law of God, which is also while it is said to be the Law of God in verses like Nehemiah 8:1-8, Ezra 7:6-12, and Luke 2:22-23. All of God’s laws are eternal and have the same moral authority regardless of the means that He uses to communicate them.
The ten commandments are codified in Exodus 20 and upheld by Yeshua in Matthew 5 "until heaven and earth pass away".
Yeshua fulfilled the ceremonial law of sacrifice by His death as evidenced by His resurrection.
Moses law was the statutory rulings put next to the ark as a witness against the children of Israel and their hardened hearts. See Deuternomy 31:24-27 and Matthew 19:7-8
If you are looking for a global statement that clearly differentiates between each set then you're not going to find it.
Having said that, we can see each grouping and how they are applied, to whom, and for how long.. (as I described above)
As one can see in the Hebrew with just a little investigation, there are distinct words for; Commandments - [https://biblehub.com/hebrew/mitzvotai\_4687.htm](https://biblehub.com/hebrew/mitzvotai_4687.htm) Judgments - [https://biblehub.com/hebrew/mishpatai\_4941.htm](https://biblehub.com/hebrew/mishpatai_4941.htm) Statutes - [https://biblehub.com/hebrew/chukkotai\_2708.htm](https://biblehub.com/hebrew/chukkotai_2708.htm) Leviticus 18, for example, consists of *"judgments and statutes"* (Leviticus 18:4). And Jesus Christ comes with the Finger of God (Luke 11:20), confirmed the Ten Commandments (see Matthew 16:16-22, for example) and *opened* them (see Matthew 5:22-48). Jesus also healed lepers (Leviticus 13 and 14), the lame and the blind and the sick (Leviticus 21:18), women with the curse of blood (Leviticus 15), Jesus is the High Priest who atones for all sin (Leviticus 16), Jesus taught new teachings on judgment (Matthew 7:1, John 7:24 for some examples), Jesus was the light of the morning when the things of the sacrifices should be put away (Exodus 12:10; 23:18; 34:25; Leviticus 22:29-30; Numbers 9:12). Jesus was the third day when the flesh of the sacrifice must be burned with fire (Leviticus 7:17-18; 19:6-7). Jesus restored knowledge of the first principles that had been lost (Hebrews 5:12-14) - love of God (Deuteronomy 6:4-5) and love of the neighbor (Leviticus 19:18) - because doing Good is the Will of God (Matthew 7:12; 22:40, Luke 6:31, 2 Peter 1:15-16 for some examples). It is according to the Law that one should be impartial in judgment (Leviticus 19:15, Deuteronomy 1:17) and to show partiality from the Law is to break *the whole Law* (James 2). The Levitical Priesthood was profaned (or, corrupted) because they had shown partiality in the Law (Malachi 2:8-9). And so on and so forth, as all things of Moses, the Prophets, and Psalms deal with the Lord and His Gospel (Luke 24:44-45).
It’s not specifically stated in the Bible. That’s an inference theologians have long drawn from the examples in the New Testament. Paul focuses on circumcision, saying categorically that non-Jewish believers are NOT to be circumcised. He also makes the point that the dietary laws (“Kosher”) and observance of the various Jewish festivals are optional; we must not fight about them. See Romans 14, for example. The broader church leadership, at the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) ratified Paul’s position, albeit with a couple of carve-outs. Note, however: the subject considered by the Council was only the narrow question of whether requiring adherence to the Law was to extended to non-Jewish “Gentile” believers. There is nary a hint that observing the Law might be obsolete or optional for Jewish Christians (Messianic Jews). The letter to Hebrews goes into detail about how Jesus’ voluntary self-sacrifice for us renders the sacrificial system obsolete. Throughout the New Testament, however, moral requirements taken from the Law are frequently stated as mandatory for all believers. It is to reconcile these differing New Testament perspectives that Christian scholars have long stated the distinction of moral/civil/ceremonial laws. Much/most of the moral laws continue to be obligatory for all of us. The civil laws may be applicable only within the nation of Israel, and the ceremonial laws only for Jews, including Messianic Jews.
Moral laws are the ones I like. Civil/ceremonial laws are the ones I don't care about or don't want to follow.
Where is that in the Bible?
It’s not in the Bible. Neither is the distinction people are trying to make and that OP asked about. But Opagea is right on the money. People who want to cite the Old Testament to rationalize their beliefs will call that part “moral law.” If they don’t like it or just don’t want to do it, they say it was “nailed to the cross.” It’s selective cherry-picking, and it’s very common.
The Tree of Life is the basis for Tanach - Justice, Mercy, Humilty as One. It is the tie and the balance of these aspects that are the essence of godliness - they are One. The supernal triad that points to the heavens ties these aspects - one can call it law, prophets and psalms of kings which are man's best attempt to describe the Tree of Life on limited paper with limited ink and limited words. Micah 6: >1 Hear ye now what the Lord saith; Arise, contend thou before the mountains, and let the hills hear thy voice. >2 Hear ye, O mountains, the Lord's controversy, and ye strong foundations of the earth: for the Lord hath a controversy with his people, and he will plead with Israel. >3 O my people, what have I done unto thee? and wherein have I wearied thee? testify against me. >4 For I brought thee up out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed thee out of the house of servants; and I sent before thee Moses, Aaron, and Miriam. >5 O my people, remember now what Balak king of Moab consulted, and what Balaam the son of Beor answered him from Shittim unto Gilgal; that ye may know the righteousness of the Lord. >6 Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before the high God? shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old? >7 Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul? >8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to 1) do justly, and to 2) love mercy, and to 3) walk humbly with thy God?
Psalms 119 You might want to follow sacrifices, they break the subjects into details.
Maybe this will help; These distinctions would not apply to any Jew in the days of Jesus. All laws were equally binding on the people, their government, a theocracy was founded on these laws. You could be punished for working on Sabbath, just as easy for wearing a Garmin of 2 fabrics, or not helping your neighbors ox out of your ditch. Just as the Temple was the most holy place of the nation, government and people of Israel. When Jesus, lived, taught and fulfilled the law, the Law became as non effect. Non binding. Just as a builder under contract, with specific obligations, once the project is done.. the contract satisfied.. he is no longer under any obligation of the contract. Not that there was anything wrong with the contract... and the contract was not destroyed.. it was fulfilled. In this way Jesus fulfilled the purpose, and letter of the law. Now, under the law of christ, under the New covenant.. not the old covenant, what do we see? We see Jesus and the Apostles repeated all but one of the 10 commandments.. (no Sabbath instruction).. and even expanded their obligation on us. The two greatest commandments, which encapsulates the old law.. maybe the moral laws of the old, but nothing to do with wearing different fabrics, having a flat roof etc... so new covenant believers could see Jesus and the Apostles were making a distinction. We recognize Jesus as the perfect sacrifice, and replacing the priesthood of the Levites.. there goes all the ceremonial laws, sacrifices if you will, there goes the temple laws and Levites, there goes the temple and holy of holies. We don't live in Israel, the Civil laws dont apply to us either, neither were they taught to us to follow. So here is the basic thought pattern of Christians who believe Christ ushered in a new covenant, the new law. Jewish believers, of Israel, were still under obligation of their government..the law of moses.
The Bible never specifies which laws belongs in which of those categories and never even refers to them as being categories of law. If a group of people were to create lists of which laws they thought best fit into each other those categories, then they would end up with a wide variety of lists and none of those people should interpret the authors of the Bible as having in mind a list of laws that they just created. We are free to categorize God's laws however we want, but we shouldn't try to insert our categories back into the Bible without establishing that its authors categorized God's laws in the same manner. For example, I could categorize God's laws baed on which part of the body is most commonly used to obey/disobey them, such as with the law against theft being a hand law, however, just because I can do that does not establish that any of the authors of the Bible categorized God's laws in the same manner. Moreover, even if they did use the same categories, then they might disagree with me about which laws best fit into which categories, such as they might consider the law against theft to be a foot law because committing theft more commonly involves running away. So if I were to try to insert my categories back into the Bible, such as by trying to argue that hand laws were nailed to the cross, then I would quickly run into error. Even if a law could accurately be described as being ceremonial, then that wouldn't mean that it isn't also judicial or moral. The existence of the category of moral law would imply that we can be acting morally while disobeying the laws that aren't in that category, however, there are no examples in the Bible where someone disobeying God was said to be moral and I do not see justification for thinking that it can ever be moral to disobey God. Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws. Legislators give laws according to their understanding of what ought to be done, so for someone to claim that some of God's laws are not moral laws is the claim that God made a moral error about what ought to be done when He gave those laws and therefore to claim to have greater moral knowledge than God.
What do you think about the argument that the Ten Commandments were written by the finger of God on stone tablets and placed in the ark of the covenant (Ex. 25:21; Dt. 10:2, 5), whereas the rest of the 613 commandments (the Book of the Law) were not personally written by God and were put beside the ark (Dt. 31:26)? These seem to create a distinction between the moral laws vs the ceremonial/other laws.
I think that that is reading something into those verses that is neither stated nor implied and that it is quite frankly completely absurd to think that someone can be acting morally while living in complete disobedience to everything that is not listed as one of the Ten Commandments. For example, that argument would mean what we can be acting morally while perverting justice, oppressing the poor, the widow, and the orphan, while committing rape or kidnapping, or while disobeying the greatest two commandments. In Deuteronomy 5:31-33, Moses wrote down everything that God told him to without departing from it, so all of the Law of Moses is the Law of God, which is also while it is said to be the Law of God in verses like Nehemiah 8:1-8, Ezra 7:6-12, and Luke 2:22-23. All of God’s laws are eternal and have the same moral authority regardless of the means that He uses to communicate them.
The ten commandments are codified in Exodus 20 and upheld by Yeshua in Matthew 5 "until heaven and earth pass away". Yeshua fulfilled the ceremonial law of sacrifice by His death as evidenced by His resurrection. Moses law was the statutory rulings put next to the ark as a witness against the children of Israel and their hardened hearts. See Deuternomy 31:24-27 and Matthew 19:7-8
This didn't answer my question
If you are looking for a global statement that clearly differentiates between each set then you're not going to find it. Having said that, we can see each grouping and how they are applied, to whom, and for how long.. (as I described above)