Taught by Susie Leafe at UCCF South West Team Days, May 2009.
A very helpful book on this subject: ‘OT Ethics for the people of God’ by Christopher Wright.
Most of us have a bible that is dirty and well leafed in the New Testament; the Psalms are quite dirty, and maybe the beginning of Genesis. But not the bits we try to avoid, like Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Yet that’s where our mates often go first in grilling a Christian!
How are we meant to understand the Old Testament law? How does it relate to the New Testament and the overall biblical gospel of grace?
Problems start when we zoom in on the little verses and forgo the bigger picture. See Leviticus 19:19ff – how do you deal with that?
One approach is to consider the different types of law. The classic division of the law is between the Ceremonial (relating to sacrifices and the temple), the Civil (relating to the Israelite state), and the Moral (the only bit left). The problem with this division is that nowhere in the Bible suggests this approach! Yet when we look at the law, we see there are different types – but we need to let the bible explain what those types are, rather than imposing them on the bible.
Two different ways of looking at the relationship between the Old Testament and the New Testament:
(1) They are the old and new covenants, and a completely different world. This is called dispensationalism. The blank page in the middle of the Bible, separating Old Testament from New, is very important.
(2) Rip the middle page out – the bible is the same all the way. This is called theonism, when taken to an extreme. There is no change. An extreme theonist might say that all the sexually immoral should be killed, because it says so in the Old Testament; it’s all one book and although we’re saved by grace, we should still consider the Old Testament law for our lives. Some cults would embrace and exemplify a type of this.
The reality may be that we probably have bits of both in our understanding. Many people are happily both, for example on their stance on the Sabbath.
How should we approach it? Christopher Wright argues that as Christians, we tend to approach the Law totally differently to the rest of the bible; but we need to remember, it was given to a people, and that Jews in referring to the Law mean the first 5 books – it is not separate to the exodus etc. So: 1. We need to get our heads into the context of when the Law was given.
When was it given? The big chunk of it was given at Mount Sinai – after the exodus, and before entering the promised land.
In Deuteronomy 4:1-8, Moses reflecting back on what happened, as they are waiting to go into promised land. They know about God: he has rescued them from slavery. The Law wasn’t given in order to be rescued – they already had been. They received the law as saved people. So what is the purpose of the law, if not to save us?
- Verses 6-8: to show the righteousness of God to the other nations. The same reason we’re to live righteously.
- Also v1-2: the Law given so that they may live. Compare with Jesus’ words: “I come to give you life and life in all its fulness.” It was given for the goodness of life.
So then, why does it say not to get any tattoos? Can you see any link or answer yet? I can’t see one! So we need to do more work.
God never expected his people to earn their way. When God gives them the law, they say ‘we’ll keep this’, and straight away God says, ‘sprinkle them with blood. If they’re going to try and keep it, they need a sacrifice.’ (See Exodus 20 ish)
Also consider the tabernacle: the law was kept in a safe place beyond the place of sacrifice. There is always a sacrifice between the people and the law. They were never meant ever to try and earn their way to God. It’s given in a place of grace, to live life to its fulness, to show people what god is like.
2. Israel was to set up a new community. Within this context, it is worth considering the different types of laws included:
(i) Some laws are state laws, ie criminal laws. Criminal laws are there because we say it is bad to do X so we will punish those who do so. Homosexuality used to be criminal, ie considered bad for the country – so people were punished for it. Within the last 60 years people say it is not harmful in any way – so it’s been decriminalised. For us as evangelicals: we think extra-marital sexual activity may be harmful, but neither do we want to say it should be criminalised. We are caught between two extremes. But in the Old Testament, Israel are the church community and the state community. There is a big question over how much church and state should be connected etc, but we shouldn’t necessarily expect our government to go for Old Testament laws.
(ii) There are some health and safety laws – compassionate laws. It’s not criminal to work your donkey on the Sabbath, but it is compassionate.
(iii) There is plenty ceremonial law – sacrificial stuff, regulations for celebrations and festivals (sabbath, passover etc) and the clean/unclean laws on physical cleanliness, food cleanliness, and temple cleanliness. Why was important for people to be clean? So that the rest of the world says, we want to be like that, can we join you. The priestly group were the holiest, who had to be the cleanest. Then the community people had to be quite clean; and then there were people outside. Different boundaries. Note in this context the parable of the Good Samaritan: it’s not just that the Levite and the priest were being snobs, but there was a theological battle going on; if they touched the man, they would make themselves unclean and unfit for serving their people. The question of the parable is not a morality issue but a cleanliness issue – what does it mean to be unclean? Jesus is continuing those issues of clean/unclean, but he starts to make the point about the spiritual cleanliness. It has been seen physically, now spiritually. Barriers are no longer needed – no high priest needed, no sacrifice. But reading about them helps us understand how clean we should be compared to the world out there. Our lives make a difference to the way people see us.
(iv) There are also various random laws: eg tattoos. Why are tattoos bad? Don’t do the things the people around you do in their worship. A wisdom issue. What does a tattoo say about you? Does it say anything? Not really. Previously in our culture, it said, “I’m hard, rebellious and want to be different.” At that point, you’re more clearly aligning yourself. What about bindies for Christians? On the one hand, Christians shouldn’t have them because we’re identifying ourselves with Hindus. Yet depends on the culture you’re in – what if you live in a Hindu culture and want to reach across cultural barriers? Not so black and white…
This is the way we approach the law. What was its purpose initially? Its purpose is the thing we should consider. These laws make us think about every area of our lives from God’s perspective – great!
(v) There are also family laws. These are difficult – the context of Israel was of 12 tribes with family heads, who had huge control over their families, with several generations living together. Chris Wright – maybe we should be thinking how we relate as church and biological families in taking responsibility for each other.
So, a helpful approach to consider the Old Testament law is (1) consider the wider context; (2) consider what type of law it is; (3) consider what the purpose of the law was then and how that relates to today.
