Introduction
The Old Testament law is seen as irrelevant by most modern Christians today. Christians are now under the blood of Jesus Christ, which is said to abrogate the Law. Galatians 6:2 says, “Bear one another's burdens, and thereby fulfill the law of Christ” (NASB). The law of Christ is to love God and your neighbor as yourself (Matthew 22:36-40). This does not mean, however, that the Old Testament Law does not apply to Christians today. Author J. Daniel Hays expounds on this topic in his article, “Applying the Old Testament Law Today,” and focuses on the method of Principlism. This approach allows the Old Testament Law to be viewed in light of the New Testament.
Reflection of Principlism
The traditional approach to the Mosaic Law is categorized by moral, civil, and ceremonial laws. Hays postulates this approach is not correct as it has three major weaknesses: it has no textual support, it ignores the narrative context, and it fails to reflect the changes from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant. Hays asserts the correct method is Principlism, a five method approach to applying the Law.
The five methods of Principlism are identifying what specific laws meant to the target audience, determining the differences between the original audience and Christians today, developing universal principles from the Bible, correlating a law from the Old Testament and applying it to the New Testament, and applying a universal principle to life today. Each approach has strengths, but at the same time has weaknesses. The first method identifies a specific law and applies it to the context of the Scripture. Hays says, “Connecting texts to their contexts is a basic tenet of proper interpretive method. The Law is part of a story, and ...
... middle of paper ...
...t. This law is repeated as Christians are saved by the blood of Jesus Christ and God views the blood the same way He did in the Old Testament. The life of the flesh is in the blood, this time it is the life of Jesus Christ, and sins are forgiven by His shed blood. This is the reason Christians are restricted from eating blood.
Conclusion
Principlism is a five step approach to interpret the Old Testament Law in light of the New Testament. This approach allows believers to apply these principles to their lives today. This does not destroy the teachings of the Old Testament, but allows for reflection on the text without diminishing the New Testament. Principlism also has weaknesses as Hays says that Principlism “may tend to oversimplify some of the complex issues,” however Principlism is more simplified and easier to understand than the traditional method.
Much like the laws in the Old Testament, the law is God solving a problem before it occurs (Maxwell, 2010). As Reggie Joiner reminds us: “Relationship comes before rules” (Maxwell, 2010, 176). If a relationship forms, rules are easier to embrace. Rules are a tool to keep the ship and everyone on it going in the same direction. Shared systems of values strengthen partnerships minimizing the possibility of comprise. Values determine our actions. Our conscience can be a fickle thing if not tended to. A good study of 1 Timothy 1:5 will sharpen the cause for keeping the conscience in order and know that a good conscience is the product of a pure heart. Finally, we trust fully in God’s promises to comfort us, but need to share that same comfort through an empowerment to do so from God himself. Kept promises are the glue that holds all the guidelines together and shuttles them into the heart and soul of mankind by building
It is the reader and his or her interpretive community who attempts to impose a unified reading on a given text. Such readers may, and probably will, claim that the unity they find is in the text, but this claim is only a mask for the creative process actually going on. Even the most carefully designed text can not be unified; only the reader's attempted taming of it. Therefore, an attempt to use seams and shifts in the biblical text to discover its textual precursors is based on a fundamentally faulty assumption that one might recover a stage of the text that lacked such fractures (Carr 23-4).
From my reading of Galatians, I would say that we should not follow the Jewish Law. If the Jewish law were the only way a person can be saved, then there would be no need for Jesus’s death. The apostle Paul also noticed this error because he tells the readers that because of his new understanding of the Law, he has come to reject the Law (Galatians 2:19). The Law is not the “end-all-be-all”, it is simply a filler until Jesus. Before the time of Jesus, people needed a moral code to live by, but they have a new Law to follow: the teachings of Jesus Christ!
"If it was good enough for the Lord in the Old Testament, it ought to be good enough for the state of West Virginia with the burdens we put on folks."
...his was the reason God gave the commandment not to eat blood, as the blood represents life, and most of all represents the blood of Christ poured out for all sinners. This command was so important that it carried over to the New Testament. This reflects the fourth approach of Principlism, applying an Old Testament law to the New Testament. This law is repeated as Christians are saved by the blood of Jesus Christ. It is to be remembered by the shed blood of Jesus Christ, and therefore the Old Testament law still applies to Christians today.
Milton's Mosaic Law and Law of Grace Comparison Certainly anyone who has been involved with Sunday school at church, has taken a religion class, or has any knowledge of the Christian religion has heard of Moses, the man who carried a big stick, parted the Red Sea and led the Israelites out of slavery into the “Promised Land.” However, there is more to Moses’ story than a forty-year excursion through the desert. Besides his role in freeing his people, Moses also served as a vessel for the Word of God. The events that this man was so instrumental in have been referenced throughout history, and the Law of Moses provides the basis of John Milton’s discussion of divorce in his 1644 treatise Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce.
wouldn't be in the Bible. If God wanted us to live by his rules, why
Luther states “the law is spiritual. If the law were for the body, it could be satisfied with works. Because it is spiritual, however, no one can satisfy it- unless all that you do is done from the bottom of the heart” (Luther 77). What Luther really means by this is that law can only be fulfilled where there is a spiritual heart and where that spirit is absent from the heart then there is sin and dissatisfaction with the law. A law is achieved by doing works which God decides if we are performing these tasks with the will of God from the heart. However, one will be punished by God for performing deeds when there is no heart because God is not satisfied by individuals who only do good works when others are watching or to get something in return. (Luther 76). Laws are meant to keep the sinful attributes of individuals under control through the fear of punishment. The law shows anyone that compares their life to Christ’s life who was without sin that he or she is sinful. God gave us law not because he is harsh but to help society maintain order and is also a guide so that we can know what good works will please God. The book of laws are found in the Old Testament which teaches what individuals can and cannot do. The Old Testament is comprised of the demanding of good, stories of how laws can be maintained or broken, and promising the forgiveness of sin (Luther 98). The apostles use the
Thus, an effort is made to highlight how Bible interpretation – through its publication – has developed in the history of Christianity.
Throughout the Bible the theme of covenant is intertwined within all the books and stories that are read, from Genesis to Revelation. Covenants were at work behind the scenes throughout the history of the Bible and are still at work today. “The traditional Christian theology
Hermeneutics is the study of these questions and whether we can bridge the gap between these different contexts? The significance of each context is crucial for readers to have balanced perspective and balanced reading of historical texts. And context is important in hermeneutics because while the Bible was written ‘for us’ it wasn’t written ‘to us’ .
Consequently we ask the question where does the idea of the Bible effecting Christian ethical decision making stop having unlimited interpretation. Interpretation can keep on being made of the biblical texts in so many different ways. A Christian living in today’s modern society who is practicing with the Bible as the role of how they base their ethical decisions has many things to consider. Mainly direct and indirect interpretation is to be had of the old and new testaments. Bringing the Bible stories and parables into context helps modern Christians to understand and live out ethically correct lives by applying it to the situation they are in.
Unfortunately for Christians, there is actually very little law in the Bible -- either Old Testament or New -- that is original. Consider the Torah of the ancient Jews. The laws of the Babylonians, Assyrians, Sumerians, Hammurapi, Eshnunna, Hittites, Mishnah, and Israelites all bear a striking resemblance to each other, due to widespread copying of laws. Shared social norms produced identical laws against sorcery, kidnapping, sale of an abducted person, false witness, business dishonesty, bribing judges, property right violations, shutting off irrigation canals used by others, etc. The complete list of identical laws and customs is quite extensive. & nbsp; Nor is the New Testament's approach to the law unique.
And again, “Nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus. . . since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified.” Gal. 2:16.