The Relationship Between Old and New Testament Morality:

There is an obvious link between the Old Testament and the New. Jesus said "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them" (Matt. 5:17, NIV). In the same passage it is said that not the least element of the Law will pass away until everything is accomplished. It would seem apparent that we cannot simply ignore the Old Testament. We know that some elements of the Law have been taken up into Christ, and so fulfilled in him. One notable example is the the offering of blood sacrifices for sin - Christ became the final and all-sufficient sacrifice, eliminating the need for any other. Another example is the observance of the Sabbath. The book of Hebrews makes it abundantly clear that Christ is our sabbath - that we honor him by 'resting', i.e. trusting in him, rather than by restricting our activities each saturday.

On the other hand, some passages in the New Testament speak, not of the Law being fulfilled, but changed. Peter's vision in Acts 10:9-16, where God commands Peter to disobey the ordinances regarding clean and unclean foods, originally laid down in Leviticus 11. Further, in Acts 15 we read the account of the church coucil sending word to the gentiles, where they stated that they had no need to be circumsized. Instead, they required only that they abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, blood, and sexual immorality. Where, in this pronouncement, are the Ten Commandments? Where the mysterious laws regarding the mixing of fibers or seed?

So we have, at first glance, a rather confused picture of the relevance of the Old Testament Law. We are told that we cannot ignore it, but neither do we (necessarily) need to obey it. This study is an attempt to gather data and create a consistent correlation between new testament beliefs and old testament laws.

(Following are several key passages for study:)

• Matthew 5:17,18"I have not come to abolish the Law...."
• Acts 15"...we should not make it difficult for the gentiles who are turning to God. Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood."
• I Corintians 6:12"...evrything is permissible...."
• Ephesians 2:14-16"...abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations."
• Colossians 2:13-17"...having cancelled the written code.... ...do not let anyone judge you by ... a religious festival... or a sabbath day."
• I Timothy 1:8"... the law is good if one uses it properly."
• Hebrews [All]

From these verses, we can see that the law does not reign over us - it is not OUR covenant. It has not been destroyed, however, and neither should it be ignored, as it reveals sin. It would seem then that our problem is a practical one - how can we differentiate between those laws which reveal sin, and those that are merely ceremonial or cultural (though no doubt still useful in other ways)? In other words, how can we use the law 'properly', as in Timothy 1:8?

I believe there exists (at least) three criteria which can be used to isolate part of the moral law embedded within the former covenant - which is a reflection of God's very nature. The first of these criteria is self-evident: that is the statement of sin itself. For example in Leviticus 5:1, the LORD states that dishonesty (or the witholding of information) is sin. I think it is self-evident that whenever God makes a statement as to the sinfulness of an act, that statement transcends any particular covenant, and therefore applies to us today.

Secondly, when God makes a statement of a personal nature concerning an act, I doubt that the act has merely an instructive or ceremonial significance. Statements from the mouth of God such as "I abhor" or "I hate" are direct reflections of the nature of God and His holiness, and as such would not be altered by the termination of the former covenant. And as we are to 'put on Christ', we must adopt the attitudes of the Father toward these acts as our own.

Lastly, I believe that the nature of the punishments declared for certain actions may aid us in determining whether the action is part of a particular covenant, or transcends it. In particular, it seems as if the punishment of death is never given for ceremonial transgressions, but only for transgressions of the essential moral law. In Proverbs 11:19 we read that "...he who pursues evil goes to his death", and in Romans 5:12 "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned...." These verses are provided, not as proof of my assumption, but simply to show enough support for it to continue, waiting upon the results of such an analysis, and the consistency of those results, as evidence of the correctness of the assumptions.

Hereafter follows a listing of verses from the Pentatuch which, when viewed through the criteria given above, define what seems to be a very familiar moral law - one which, readily fits my expectation of a culturally transcendant morality. The sins of idolatry, irreverence, murder, disrespect, kidnapping, injustice, perversion - all these and more may be found by applying these criteria to the old covenant.

• Exodous 20:4-6 Idolotry. Here we have both a personal statement ('jealous'), as well as a statement of sin.
• 20:7 Misuse of the LORD's name has a personal statement attatched to it ("will not hold anyone guiltless").
• 20:8 Note that none of the criteria set forth above is present here. Also, refer to Collossians 2:13-17, as well as Hebrews 4. The Christian sabbath IS Christ, so this is one area where we can se that, though the Law is still in effect, it has been completely fulfilled in Christ for us.
• 21:12 Murder. Sin against the image of God in which we are made.
• 21:15 Attacks his father or mother. The word 'attacks' could be used in a literal or a figurative sense. Honor and respect for parental authority is crucial, and it's lack is morally repugnant to God.
• 21:16 Kidnapping - a sin against the limited sovereignty ('free will') of man, as well as a sin against justice.
• 22:18 Sorcery or witchcraft. Always used in conjunction with idolatry.
• 22:22-27 Here is a personal statement by God that He does not love oppression.
• 22:19 Sexual perversion is condemned throughout. Bestiality is the first example established via the stated criteria.
• Leviticus 17:10-12 Eating of blood here is forbidden due to it's use in making atonement for sin. Our atonement has once and for all been made, so the blood of animals would no longer be prohibited for us.
• 18:17 Sexual relations within a family unit cause pain and division on a large scale. God expresses His strong feelings against this.
• 18:22 Homosexuality is a perversion that God disdains. Note however that it doesn't state His abhorence of feelings or confusion or pain related to this sin, but only disdain for the action.
• 20:10-16 Adultery - possibly seen as another perversion. The sexual nature is the source of many prohibitions. God knows the power of this aspect of our nature, both for good and for evil, and prohibits our misuses of it.
• Deuteronomy 25:16 Honesty.
• Proverbs 6:16, 3:31-32, 12:22, 16:5.
  

Additional passages for study:

Romans 3:21-24, 5:20 - 6:2, 7:1-12, 8:1-4, 14:1-4