Post by Josh on Feb 17, 2007 10:16:15 GMT -8
8/18/06:
Which OT laws are still binding to the Christian, and how do we know?
Do Christians just arbitrarily pick the 'laws' they like from the OT and ignore the other ones as no longer applicable, or is there some kind of rationale to be applied?
Don't know if I quite have the time to tackle this all at once.
I'll start by saying that there are some very distinct, broad categories of 'law' in the Old Testament, and, as the early Christian interpreters pointed out, it's important to look at each separately for some good reasons.
Here are the 3 cateogries of OT law typically isolated by Christian interpreters:
1) Moral Law- these laws deal with behaviors/ actions that are said, or presumed, to be intrinsically wrong. An example would be do not steal, or do not commit adultery. Moral laws in the Mosaic Covenant apply both to Hebrews and foreigners- they are universal.
2) Civil Law- civil law is the law that explains what to do when a moral law has been breached.
It's important to distinguish between what is morally wrong according to the law, and what is legally to be done about it.
An example: in Exodus 20:13, there is a MORAL prohibition against murder (murder is declared to be morally wrong by the Mosaic Law). But murder is to be responsed to with a CIVIL Law (found, for example, in Numbers 35) stating that the offender is to be put to death if found to be guilty.
3) Ceremonial Law- This refers to the great body of specific law pertaining to two objectives of the Pentateuch:
a) setting up a distinct ancient Israelite system of worship, and
b) establishing the Hebrews as a distinct culture, radically separate from the cultures around them.
So, for example, Ceremonial law includes detailed laws about how the Tabernacle was to be set up and operated, as well as laws about what Jews were to eat and wear.
With that said, Christian interpreters, going right back to Paul himself, have held up the moral law of the Old Testament as continually binding.
The civil law of the Old Testament seemed to have been re-interpreted by Paul and others to fit the world in which he lived- a world where Romans were in control, not the Jews. For instance, where the Mosaic Law might dictate that a person be 'cut off from his people' (ie, capital punishment), Paul uses the phrase in regard to Church meaning rather to 'disfellowship' or 'excommunicate' someone.
Likewise, later Judeo-Christian interpreters, including even some of the founders of this country, have sought to apply at least the general concepts found in OT civil law to more modern civil legal structures.
It is the ceremonial laws that Christian interpreters have generally found to not be legalistically binding on New Covenant believers. Jesus and Paul themselves seem to have started this ball rolling, with their insistence that ceremonial law is vastly inferior to moral law.
That's not to say that we might as well skip the ceremonial law when we're reading the OT. Far from it. It certainly served a purpose in God's grand story. Through them we can learn a lot about God's priorities (especially what they say about holiness). Also, there are great Christian interpretive traditions that help us see a wealth of symbolic importance in the OT ceremonial law as well-- stuff we'll delve into a lot around here. There are some AWESOME jewels to be found in OT ceremonial law.
Most laws fit one of these categories pretty clearly. There are a few which are difficult to assign (those are the ones that Christians have sometimes argued over).
Hope that helps.
Which OT laws are still binding to the Christian, and how do we know?
Do Christians just arbitrarily pick the 'laws' they like from the OT and ignore the other ones as no longer applicable, or is there some kind of rationale to be applied?
Don't know if I quite have the time to tackle this all at once.
I'll start by saying that there are some very distinct, broad categories of 'law' in the Old Testament, and, as the early Christian interpreters pointed out, it's important to look at each separately for some good reasons.
Here are the 3 cateogries of OT law typically isolated by Christian interpreters:
1) Moral Law- these laws deal with behaviors/ actions that are said, or presumed, to be intrinsically wrong. An example would be do not steal, or do not commit adultery. Moral laws in the Mosaic Covenant apply both to Hebrews and foreigners- they are universal.
2) Civil Law- civil law is the law that explains what to do when a moral law has been breached.
It's important to distinguish between what is morally wrong according to the law, and what is legally to be done about it.
An example: in Exodus 20:13, there is a MORAL prohibition against murder (murder is declared to be morally wrong by the Mosaic Law). But murder is to be responsed to with a CIVIL Law (found, for example, in Numbers 35) stating that the offender is to be put to death if found to be guilty.
3) Ceremonial Law- This refers to the great body of specific law pertaining to two objectives of the Pentateuch:
a) setting up a distinct ancient Israelite system of worship, and
b) establishing the Hebrews as a distinct culture, radically separate from the cultures around them.
So, for example, Ceremonial law includes detailed laws about how the Tabernacle was to be set up and operated, as well as laws about what Jews were to eat and wear.
With that said, Christian interpreters, going right back to Paul himself, have held up the moral law of the Old Testament as continually binding.
The civil law of the Old Testament seemed to have been re-interpreted by Paul and others to fit the world in which he lived- a world where Romans were in control, not the Jews. For instance, where the Mosaic Law might dictate that a person be 'cut off from his people' (ie, capital punishment), Paul uses the phrase in regard to Church meaning rather to 'disfellowship' or 'excommunicate' someone.
Likewise, later Judeo-Christian interpreters, including even some of the founders of this country, have sought to apply at least the general concepts found in OT civil law to more modern civil legal structures.
It is the ceremonial laws that Christian interpreters have generally found to not be legalistically binding on New Covenant believers. Jesus and Paul themselves seem to have started this ball rolling, with their insistence that ceremonial law is vastly inferior to moral law.
That's not to say that we might as well skip the ceremonial law when we're reading the OT. Far from it. It certainly served a purpose in God's grand story. Through them we can learn a lot about God's priorities (especially what they say about holiness). Also, there are great Christian interpretive traditions that help us see a wealth of symbolic importance in the OT ceremonial law as well-- stuff we'll delve into a lot around here. There are some AWESOME jewels to be found in OT ceremonial law.
Most laws fit one of these categories pretty clearly. There are a few which are difficult to assign (those are the ones that Christians have sometimes argued over).
Hope that helps.