Tag Archives: law

Why the New Testament doesn’t have a Torah

Leave a reply

While the Jews had their canon within a canon, what about the early church? The Jews emphasized the Torah above the other scriptures? What about early Christians? Specifically, how did they see the New Testament writings?

I would argue that the stratifying of authority took place during the years when the canon was in flux. That is, writings seen to be of lesser authority were not included as part of the New Testament. There were highly respected books like the Didache or 1 Clement that were read regularly, but not seen as part of the authoritative scriptures of the church.

There was debate about some of the accepted books, like 2 Peter or Jude. But for the most part, the books we use today were seen as holy scriptures. (And yes, I’m greatly simplifying decades and decades of study and debate)

I don’t place the epistles over the gospels nor vice versa. I do read the varying literary sections in different ways, which helps explain why I don’t take Revelation literally (Jesus isn’t a slain lamb with seven horns and seven eyes)

I guess the huge difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament is that the Old Testament had books that were expected to be read as law; that’s why the Torah was/is seen differently. The New Testament lacks such legal code. There are commands and instructions throughout the New Testament writings, but there is nothing similar to what we find in the laws of the Torah.

That’s where I ended up on this mental side trip. How about you?

Law, grace, and pleasing God

Leave a reply

gavelI don’t believe that the New Testament contains a law similar to that found in the Old Testament. Obviously the form isn’t similar; just do some reading in Leviticus, and you’ll see that. I don’t think the intent is similar either. It’s not about, “Do each and every one of these things exactly as written, or you’ll burn in hell.”

So if we’re not looking for ways to get ourselves saved or keep ourselves saved, why bother figuring out what God wants of us? For that matter, why did Paul and Peter and James and John write letters to the churches instructing them on how to live? Why bother? If most things aren’t salvation issues, then they don’t matter at all, do they?

In the article I linked to yesterday, the one about the Gospel Immunization Shot, Greg Boyd uses an illustration that I’ve used in the past: marriage. Can you imagine a marriage where each spouse says, “They won’t divorce me over this, so it doesn’t matter what I do”? That would be a horrible relationship. A good marriage comes about when each partner is looking how to please the other one.

I want to please God. And I know he wants what’s best for me. I know he wants what’s best for his church. For example, I don’t see regular church attendance as a salvation issue. But I do see it as a part of a healthy relationship. I don’t think that a congregation that doesn’t have elders and deacons will be left out of heaven because of it. But I do think that church won’t be what God intended for it to be. And we can go on and on.

I’m going to do my best to learn what God wants for me, what he wants of me, what he wants in his church. I’m going to do my best to practice those things and teach them to others. Not because I don’t believe in grace, but precisely because I do:

“But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me.” (1 Corinthians 15:10)

Jesus Christ is Lord. Because of that, I want to know what he wants me to do. I’m not afraid that he’s going to reject me at the last day. I just want to please him as much as I can until then. I don’t want him to say of me:

“Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord,’ and not do what I tell you?” (Luke 6:46)

Law and Grace, Faith and Works

1 Reply

legalLast week we were looking at some unhealthy attitudes toward the Old Testament (and the Gospels, along the way). But it’s not just about the attitudes toward that (huge) section of Scripture. It’s really about how we look at the Bible itself.

For some people, the Bible is merely a book of rules, a legal code, the constitution for God’s Kingdom. Wade Tannehill said it well the other day:

But here is what has changed. The legal texts of Moses were in some cases highly detailed and prescriptive. Some would read the New Testament literature as if it were the same genre as the Book of the Covenant or the Holiness Code. This amounts to viewing the New Testament books, not as occasional literature written to aid disciples in a Christocentric reading of the Hebrew Scriptures, but as a flat law code of new legal stipulations for Christians.

Where the old law / new law dichotomy really misses the point is its misunderstanding of law in Scripture. Those seeking to understand the New Testament writings as a legal code are making a similar mistake to the Judaizers of old. The law is imagined to be in a position it was never intended to hold. The law has never been a means of salvation. No one has ever been saved by law-keeping, under any covenant. Salvation has always been by grace through faith.

Yes! Exactly. When we think that what Jesus did was substitute one written code for another, we fall into the trap that Paul condemned in the Galatian letter. When we depend on law, any kind of law, then we are no longer depending on grace. And that’s a dangerous thing: “You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.” (Galatians 5:4)

I heard a man speak at a youth camp 30 years ago, presenting the argument that the New Law was merely an improvement on the Old Law. He argued that when Paul says we aren’t saved by works, he only means works of the Law of Moses;”obviously we are saved by works.”

No! The New Testament is not a revised copy of the Pentateuch. It’s about coming into a relationship with God through Christ, seeking to live out our lives as an imitation of our Redeemer. We do that not to be saved but because that’s who we were called to be.

“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.” (Ephesians 2:8-10)

Not saved by works, but created for works.

We don’t need a new legal code. We need a Savior.

Slippery slopes and fences

4 Replies

I’ve written before about the rabbinic principle of building a fence around the Torah. The idea is that one creates a barrier of rules around the Law to prevent the accidental breaking of the Law. According to some sources, Deuteronomy 22:8 is used to justify this practice: “When you build a new house, make a parapet around your roof so that you may not bring the guilt of bloodshed on your house if someone falls from the roof.”

It was, of course, this fence around the Law that led the Pharisees to condemn Jesus; they accused him of not following “the traditions of the fathers.” He didn’t violate the Torah itself, but he was willing to go beyond their fences.

I realized recently the modern day expression of the fence around the Law is the slippery slope. Things that aren’t seen as condemnable in and of themselves are condemned based on what they might lead to. That is, action A isn’t seen as sinful, but it might lead to action B, therefore action A is wrong.

One church was discussing hand clapping during worship. Someone said, “If we allow this, next thing you know they’ll be dancing in the aisles!” That’s the slippery slope.

Problem is, of course, almost anything can be seen as leading to anything else. Are the Wright brothers to blame for the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center? Slippery slope reasoning would lay the blame squarely at their feet. Reminds me of the song “Ya Got Trouble” from the musical The Music Man. In that song, Harold Hill warns the citizens of River City that the presence of a pool table in their community was a sign of impending moral corruption among their youth. (If you haven’t heard it, you can find it on YouTube)

One thing does not invariably lead to another. Slippery slopes are great for skiing on, but that’s about it. We need to judge things on their own merits, not conjectured inevitable consequences.

 

Photo by Spencer Ritenour

System of grace

15 Replies

Not much time to write, but I wanted to throw this into the discussion we’re having this week. Years ago, I heard Dan Coker say, “Many of the church’s problems arise because men try to take a system of grace and turn it into a system of law.”

How fair is that? How do we avoid turning grace into law while still seeking to have an obedient faith? Are statements like Dan’s no more than an attempt to avoid law altogether?