-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
O.T. Law
- Thread starter donnA
- Start date
Hey Katie,
Boy, you opened up a deep topic. I'll be interested to hear what other people have to say.
This is what I have always thought about the Law. And if I am wrong, then anyone feel free to correct me. I am just giving my opinion.
Jesus said that he came here to fulfill the law and not to destroy it.
The Apostle Paul said that all scripture was good for us. Good for molding our doctrine , for correcting our behavior,...
Well, what does all of that mean?
I think it means that we, as New Testament Christians, are not bound by the explicit letter of the law, but we are still to obey the spirit of the law.
For example:
I. All those animal sacrifices. We don't do that as Christians. Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice. Jews don't do it anymore because there is no Temple.
We study it, though, in our Bibles and read it to understand fully what God means when He says that the wages of sin is death and that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin.
God was saying, "This is what you deserve. You deserve to be gutted like fish and have your blood and innards spilt on a altar. But because I love you, I will allow an innocent animal to take your place. And understand this. One is coming to will take all of this upon Him for all time."
II. What about those temple rituals? There were scads of do's and don'ts of what to do with the temple, when to do it, how to treat it, what colors to use, what incense to burn, what people were allowed authority there, how they were to dress.....and on and on!
Well, Christians don't have temples. So we have nothing to take care of. Or do we? The New Testament says that our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit and we are to treat it accordingly.
Well, if by studying the old law and seeing how serious God was about the temple-building, aren't we then able to see how more important our bodies are in service to Him?
III. What about circumcision? It's still a cultural practice in many places today, but it not necessary to be saved.
The Apostle Paul talks about the circumcision of the heart in a very beautiful manner. Today, men are not marked physically for God, but today women are allowed to be included and ALL people who are Christians are marked in their hearts for Jesus.
We read about physical circumcision in the law and before the law was given as part of a serious contract between men and the Lord. It's important to read about that. It was not taken lightly at all and was an outward sign of faithfulness. Our circumcision of the heart today is just as serious.
IV. And what about all of those purification rituals? You know, when people's bodies were unclean they had to abstain from sacrificing for so many days. Bodily discharges, touching the dead, having a baby, coming in contact with lepers,...all that stuff made people unclean. And when they came back to the tabernacle or the temple, they had to purify themselves before they could be considered by God.
Well, we don't do that anymore. Jesus said that it wasn't what came from the lips, but what came from the heart that made a person unworthy. But it is important to study these laws and the required responses from the people, because it reminds us of just how easily sin can makes us "unclean" before God.
The Bible says for example that we are not to partake of the Lord's Supper in an unworthy manner. That is, if have unconfessed sin in our lives or are in a squabble with a fellow Christian. We can't come to a place of worship and have unconfessed sin in our heart. The law reminds us today of that.
Well, I've rambled long enough.
No, we do not necessarilly keep the detailed specifics of the Law. But it reminds us that we are sinners and the spiritually principles and moral foundations that God rested the law upon still prevails to this very day.
Peace-
YSIC
Scarlett O.
<><
Boy, you opened up a deep topic. I'll be interested to hear what other people have to say.
This is what I have always thought about the Law. And if I am wrong, then anyone feel free to correct me. I am just giving my opinion.
Jesus said that he came here to fulfill the law and not to destroy it.
The Apostle Paul said that all scripture was good for us. Good for molding our doctrine , for correcting our behavior,...
Well, what does all of that mean?
I think it means that we, as New Testament Christians, are not bound by the explicit letter of the law, but we are still to obey the spirit of the law.
For example:
I. All those animal sacrifices. We don't do that as Christians. Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice. Jews don't do it anymore because there is no Temple.
We study it, though, in our Bibles and read it to understand fully what God means when He says that the wages of sin is death and that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin.
God was saying, "This is what you deserve. You deserve to be gutted like fish and have your blood and innards spilt on a altar. But because I love you, I will allow an innocent animal to take your place. And understand this. One is coming to will take all of this upon Him for all time."
II. What about those temple rituals? There were scads of do's and don'ts of what to do with the temple, when to do it, how to treat it, what colors to use, what incense to burn, what people were allowed authority there, how they were to dress.....and on and on!
Well, Christians don't have temples. So we have nothing to take care of. Or do we? The New Testament says that our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit and we are to treat it accordingly.
Well, if by studying the old law and seeing how serious God was about the temple-building, aren't we then able to see how more important our bodies are in service to Him?
III. What about circumcision? It's still a cultural practice in many places today, but it not necessary to be saved.
The Apostle Paul talks about the circumcision of the heart in a very beautiful manner. Today, men are not marked physically for God, but today women are allowed to be included and ALL people who are Christians are marked in their hearts for Jesus.
We read about physical circumcision in the law and before the law was given as part of a serious contract between men and the Lord. It's important to read about that. It was not taken lightly at all and was an outward sign of faithfulness. Our circumcision of the heart today is just as serious.
IV. And what about all of those purification rituals? You know, when people's bodies were unclean they had to abstain from sacrificing for so many days. Bodily discharges, touching the dead, having a baby, coming in contact with lepers,...all that stuff made people unclean. And when they came back to the tabernacle or the temple, they had to purify themselves before they could be considered by God.
Well, we don't do that anymore. Jesus said that it wasn't what came from the lips, but what came from the heart that made a person unworthy. But it is important to study these laws and the required responses from the people, because it reminds us of just how easily sin can makes us "unclean" before God.
The Bible says for example that we are not to partake of the Lord's Supper in an unworthy manner. That is, if have unconfessed sin in our lives or are in a squabble with a fellow Christian. We can't come to a place of worship and have unconfessed sin in our heart. The law reminds us today of that.
Well, I've rambled long enough.
No, we do not necessarilly keep the detailed specifics of the Law. But it reminds us that we are sinners and the spiritually principles and moral foundations that God rested the law upon still prevails to this very day.
Peace-
YSIC
Scarlett O.
<><
Must understand the differences inherent in the OT Law.</font>
- Ceremonial Law (sacrifices, etc) are for OT worship NOT for Bob</font>
- Civil Law (stoning for crimes, etc) are for national Israel NOT for Bob</font>
- Covenant Law (Abraham, Moses, etc) is of the Old Covenant and NOT for Bob</font>
- Rabbinic Law (washings, everyday life) were for Pharisees NOT for Bob</font>
- Natural Law (gravity, creation, etc) shows mankind his sinfulness and the power of the Godhead and was intrumental in showing Bob his need for repentance and faith</font>
- Moral Law (absolutes, right-and-wrong) were for all people of all time and ARE for Bob</font>
- Law of Love (christian grace and character to one another) is something usually lacking in the life of Bob</font>
Robert J Hutton
New Member
Warm Christian greetings!
I agree with the outline of different kinds of law in Dr Bob Griffin's post.
On a general note, the main issue at stake appears to be whether or not the Sabbath Day commandment still applies. In Romans 14 v 5-6 we are told that the keeping of "days" is a matter for the individual.
Kind Regards
Robert J Hutton
I agree with the outline of different kinds of law in Dr Bob Griffin's post.
On a general note, the main issue at stake appears to be whether or not the Sabbath Day commandment still applies. In Romans 14 v 5-6 we are told that the keeping of "days" is a matter for the individual.
Kind Regards
Robert J Hutton
If we are led of the Spirit we are not under the law.
However, the Spirit of God has never led me to lie, steal, fornicate, etc...
So while I am not under the law as a pro-active way of life, I keep the commandments by virtue of following the Spirit of Christ.
And then, if I am walking in the light as He is in the light, I have no pig appetite for sin and death but a sheep appetite for green pastures and still waters.
No one has to try to keep a sheep from eating garbage and carrion or wallowing in the cesspool (though a sheep might fall in, he wants desparately to get out).
But, if I leave off following the Spirit of Christ and wander, sooner or later He leaves the ninety-and-nine sheep and... (well, you know the rest of the story).
HankD
However, the Spirit of God has never led me to lie, steal, fornicate, etc...
So while I am not under the law as a pro-active way of life, I keep the commandments by virtue of following the Spirit of Christ.
And then, if I am walking in the light as He is in the light, I have no pig appetite for sin and death but a sheep appetite for green pastures and still waters.
No one has to try to keep a sheep from eating garbage and carrion or wallowing in the cesspool (though a sheep might fall in, he wants desparately to get out).
But, if I leave off following the Spirit of Christ and wander, sooner or later He leaves the ninety-and-nine sheep and... (well, you know the rest of the story).
HankD
That was good Dr. Bob. Ceremonial law and moral law is what I was thinking of. And I didn't even think of the others. Now how do we know the difference on some of them, which ones they are, ceremonial or moral? I mean some are hard to tell which they are, or at least for me they are. Some are obvious, some don't seem so obvious to me. So I need help.
HankD, some good thoughts. I've been thinking something like that.
KATIE - You have hit on the major problem. What I see as ceremonial law and NOT applicable, another believer might interpret to be absolute moral law that is eternal.
And even the absolute moral laws that predated the mosaic law have limitations and restrictions.
Take clean/unclean animals. Moses didn't come up with that. NOAH had that coupla thousand years prior to Sinai. so is that a moral absolute law?
No. God changed it with Peter (so that Bob could eat shrimp, ham, etc thank you). So it LOOKED like it transcended the Mosaic Law and applied to all time, then ZAP it changed!
Sabbath is like that. From creation and emphasized in the Mosaic Law, so it was absolute and the Adventists are correct!??! NO. Now we have the Lord's Day.
Interesting study.
And don't get me started on the Deut 22:5 pile of crappolla that some ifb'ers thrive on (men and women's clothes) but they IGNORE 22:4 and 22:6 and say those "don't apply". Real problem!
Other thoughts?
And even the absolute moral laws that predated the mosaic law have limitations and restrictions.
Take clean/unclean animals. Moses didn't come up with that. NOAH had that coupla thousand years prior to Sinai. so is that a moral absolute law?
No. God changed it with Peter (so that Bob could eat shrimp, ham, etc thank you). So it LOOKED like it transcended the Mosaic Law and applied to all time, then ZAP it changed!
Sabbath is like that. From creation and emphasized in the Mosaic Law, so it was absolute and the Adventists are correct!??! NO. Now we have the Lord's Day.
Interesting study.
And don't get me started on the Deut 22:5 pile of crappolla that some ifb'ers thrive on (men and women's clothes) but they IGNORE 22:4 and 22:6 and say those "don't apply". Real problem!
Other thoughts?
RE: Deuteronomy 22
9 Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled.
Hmm, better check my garden.
11 Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together.
Hmm, better have the ushers check clothing labels for this.
I know, I'm a trouble maker.
HankD
9 Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled.
Hmm, better check my garden.
11 Thou shalt not wear a garment of divers sorts, as of woollen and linen together.
Hmm, better have the ushers check clothing labels for this.
I know, I'm a trouble maker.
HankD
None of These Diseases, Third Edition
By: S.I. McMillen David E. Stern
Description: More than one million people have Dr. S.I. McMillen's None of These Diseases on their bookshelf. Now Dr. David Stern updates this work on biblical healthcare to address the issues we face today. In None of These Diseases: Healthy Living for the 21st Century, you'll see that the laws of nutrition and purification found in the Bible still apply to our overall well-being. Follow these laws, and watch your health improve! Addresses stress, depression, cancer, AIDS, and more. 240 pages, softcover, Baker.
Excellent book-answers many of the "law" questions, though not all. Lots of common sense here;--DISCLAIMER!!
(At least the last edition I read, which is now about 20 years old. Wouldn't expect any major changes though!)
By: S.I. McMillen David E. Stern
Description: More than one million people have Dr. S.I. McMillen's None of These Diseases on their bookshelf. Now Dr. David Stern updates this work on biblical healthcare to address the issues we face today. In None of These Diseases: Healthy Living for the 21st Century, you'll see that the laws of nutrition and purification found in the Bible still apply to our overall well-being. Follow these laws, and watch your health improve! Addresses stress, depression, cancer, AIDS, and more. 240 pages, softcover, Baker.
Excellent book-answers many of the "law" questions, though not all. Lots of common sense here;--DISCLAIMER!!
(At least the last edition I read, which is now about 20 years old. Wouldn't expect any major changes though!)What would we do without ham, pork chops (Southern fried), shrimp, and sweet succulent lobster tail dipped in fresh drawn butter? (sigh)
But on a serious note, if we had always adhered to the National Law (as for Israel), would our nation be better off than we are today? i.e., adultery, fornication, homosexuality, witchcraft, drug addiction, abortion, political alliances, etc. (I note that in the history of Israel, National Law fell by the wayside the majority of the time due to political alliances.)
Anybody care to comment or will the liberals attack me yet again?
Interesting questions & interesting responses so far....
PS: Edited to say: Now about Jubilee (the 50 year feast)....wouldn't that nice! No more mortgage...
[ July 20, 2002, 10:49 AM: Message edited by: EagleLives911 ]
(sigh)But on a serious note, if we had always adhered to the National Law (as for Israel), would our nation be better off than we are today? i.e., adultery, fornication, homosexuality, witchcraft, drug addiction, abortion, political alliances, etc. (I note that in the history of Israel, National Law fell by the wayside the majority of the time due to political alliances.)
Anybody care to comment or will the liberals attack me yet again?
Interesting questions & interesting responses so far....
PS: Edited to say: Now about Jubilee (the 50 year feast)....wouldn't that nice! No more mortgage...
[ July 20, 2002, 10:49 AM: Message edited by: EagleLives911 ]
Why should ministers be paid? Because it is written in the law of Moses.
Looks like this is for Bob after all,
Christians do not set aside the law, we establish the law (Rom. 3:31), not in its elementary, carnal forms, but in its true, spiritual sense--even the laws contained in Leviticus. What is really meant about not mixing linen and wool in clothes, and Dr. Bob's quotation from Deuteronomy about garments pertaining to women and to men? Are these things profitable to us?
Absolutely, as Scarlett O. aptly observed, Paul stated emphatically, all scripture is profitable for instruction in righteousnes. But how are these worked out in the Christian life?
A good place to start would be with Andrew Jukes', The Law of the Offerings: the Five Tabernacle Offerings and Their Spiritual Significance. It's true, there's much more about Christ in them beside His shed blood.
Dr. Bob said: Take clean/unclean animals. Moses didn't come up with that. NOAH had that coupla thousand years prior to Sinai. so is that a moral absolute law?
No. God changed it with Peter (so that Bob could eat shrimp, ham, etc thank you). So it LOOKED like it transcended the Mosaic Law and applied to all time, then ZAP it changed!
Sabbath is like that. From creation and emphasized in the Mosaic Law, so it was absolute and the Adventists are correct!??! NO. Now we have the Lord's Day.
In my view the Sabbath is nothing like clean vs unclean.
Sacrifice also predated Moses. Cain and Abel were offering sacrifices, but it was not so from the beginning.
Simply because something predated Moses does not mean it somehow supercedes Mosaic law. The question to ask is, was it so from the beginning?
In the beginning we see God resting on the seventh day. So though the NT form may be different, no one can say that the Fourth Commandment is no longer in force.
If by breaking one part of the Decalogue I violate all of it (James 2:10), then it follows that if one part has been done away, then it all has been done away.
No. God changed it with Peter (so that Bob could eat shrimp, ham, etc thank you). So it LOOKED like it transcended the Mosaic Law and applied to all time, then ZAP it changed!
Sabbath is like that. From creation and emphasized in the Mosaic Law, so it was absolute and the Adventists are correct!??! NO. Now we have the Lord's Day.
In my view the Sabbath is nothing like clean vs unclean.
Sacrifice also predated Moses. Cain and Abel were offering sacrifices, but it was not so from the beginning.
Simply because something predated Moses does not mean it somehow supercedes Mosaic law. The question to ask is, was it so from the beginning?
In the beginning we see God resting on the seventh day. So though the NT form may be different, no one can say that the Fourth Commandment is no longer in force.
If by breaking one part of the Decalogue I violate all of it (James 2:10), then it follows that if one part has been done away, then it all has been done away.
DocCas
New Member
Why do so many Christians, when challenged regarding their convictions, resort to such meaningless ad hominem attacks?
I have never hidden myself when a brother's ox or ass has fallen by the way. And I have never killed a female bird along with her chicks when she was sitting on the nest.
Now just to be on the safe side, let's not ignore the rest of the context either.
Verse 8, when I build a house I build a railing around the roof/balcony so nobody falls off.
Verse 9, I don't sow diverse seed in my vineyard. It makes harvesting too hard. I sow different seeds in different places.
Verse 10, I never plow with an ox and an ass hitched together. One is much stronger than the other, and the other is much faster than the first. Doesn't work.
Verse 11, I never wear a garmet of wool and linen. The first time you wash it the wool will shrink and the linen will not, and the garmet will be ruined.
Verse 12, as to the tassels on the corners of my kesooth, well, I don't own a kesooth, so I guess the point is moot!
I don't ignore verse 4, or verse 5, or verse 6.
I have never hidden myself when a brother's ox or ass has fallen by the way. And I have never killed a female bird along with her chicks when she was sitting on the nest.
Now just to be on the safe side, let's not ignore the rest of the context either.
Verse 8, when I build a house I build a railing around the roof/balcony so nobody falls off.
Verse 9, I don't sow diverse seed in my vineyard. It makes harvesting too hard. I sow different seeds in different places.
Verse 10, I never plow with an ox and an ass hitched together. One is much stronger than the other, and the other is much faster than the first. Doesn't work.
Verse 11, I never wear a garmet of wool and linen. The first time you wash it the wool will shrink and the linen will not, and the garmet will be ruined.
Verse 12, as to the tassels on the corners of my kesooth, well, I don't own a kesooth, so I guess the point is moot!
ChristianCynic
<img src=/cc2.jpg>
< In the beginning we see God resting on the seventh day. So though the NT form may be different, no one can say that the Fourth Commandment is no longer in force. >
I can and I have, bud.
< If by breaking one part of the Decalogue I violate all of it {James 2:10}, then it follows that if one part has been done away, then it all has been done away. >
Moronic reasoning. The word "Decalogue" is not in the passage you cited. And in your example above concerning the sabbath, you stated "the NT form may be different." So if any part-- the particular day, no work of any kind by you, your family, servants, or animals-- is done away with-- and if the 'NT form is differnt,' it has been-- you say it has all [presumably the 'decalogue'] been done away.
I can and I have, bud.
< If by breaking one part of the Decalogue I violate all of it {James 2:10}, then it follows that if one part has been done away, then it all has been done away. >
Moronic reasoning. The word "Decalogue" is not in the passage you cited. And in your example above concerning the sabbath, you stated "the NT form may be different." So if any part-- the particular day, no work of any kind by you, your family, servants, or animals-- is done away with-- and if the 'NT form is differnt,' it has been-- you say it has all [presumably the 'decalogue'] been done away.
Man, I don't want to go here, but well, "fools rush in . . . "
Am I reading Dr. C's post right in him saying he FOLLOWS EVERYTHING IN Deuteronomy 22 as if it is all applicable today?
That's what it looks like.
If so, then what about Deut 1-21, and 23-34? What part of the LAW does NOT apply to believers today?
Not just directing this at Doc but for any imput.
Thanks (I think).
Am I reading Dr. C's post right in him saying he FOLLOWS EVERYTHING IN Deuteronomy 22 as if it is all applicable today?
That's what it looks like.
If so, then what about Deut 1-21, and 23-34? What part of the LAW does NOT apply to believers today?
Not just directing this at Doc but for any imput.
Thanks (I think).
AVL1984
<img src=../ubb/avl1984.jpg>
I don't ignore verse 4, or verse 5, or verse 6.
I have never hidden myself when a brother's ox or ass has fallen by the way. And I have never killed a female bird along with her chicks when she was sitting on the nest.
Now just to be on the safe side, let's not ignore the rest of the context either.
Verse 8, when I build a house I build a railing around the roof/balcony so nobody falls off.
Verse 9, I don't sow diverse seed in my vineyard. It makes harvesting too hard. I sow different seeds in different places.
Verse 10, I never plow with an ox and an ass hitched together. One is much stronger than the other, and the other is much faster than the first. Doesn't work.
Verse 11, I never wear a garmet of wool and linen. The first time you wash it the wool will shrink and the linen will not, and the garmet will be ruined.
Verse 12, as to the tassels on the corners of my kesooth, well, I don't own a kesooth, so I guess the point is moot!
Brother Tony
I like Bro Tony's method of interpretation!
Deuteronomy 22:5
The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy
God.
So, as long as my wife goes to the "women's apparel" section of JC Penny (for instance) to purchase slacks, its OK according to Deuteronomy 22:5.
Cool.
HankD
Deuteronomy 22:5
The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy
God.
So, as long as my wife goes to the "women's apparel" section of JC Penny (for instance) to purchase slacks, its OK according to Deuteronomy 22:5.
Cool.
HankD