# Do the laws of the Old Testament apply to Christians? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 25, 2010, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384 "2010-02-25T14:21:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Todderbob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e47774/32.png) [@Todderbob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Todderbob)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/41 "2010-02-25T22:49:24Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > John 8:36 > So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. Correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s what _John_ said, not God. So, we should trust what John said, more than what one of the Holy Trinity said? ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/42 "2010-02-25T23:02:01Z")
> [@Todderbob](#): > > Correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s what _John_ said, not God. > > So, we should trust what John said, more than what one of the Holy Trinity said? That was a quote of Jesus. ---
**Author:** ![Todderbob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e47774/32.png) [@Todderbob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Todderbob)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/43 "2010-02-25T23:23:48Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > That was a quote of Jesus. 31 So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed in him, “If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” 33 They answered him, “We are offspring of Abraham and have never been enslaved to anyone. How is it that you say, ‘You will become free’?” 34 Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave [2] to sin. 35 The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. 36 So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. 37 I know that you are offspring of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me because my word finds no place in you. 38 I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.” In context, he’s not stating that he’s setting them free of the law, but of sin. He’s not stating they’ll be free of anything but slavery, and the law itself is not slavery, it’s covenant. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/44 "2010-02-25T23:42:07Z")
> [@Todderbob](#): > > [indent] > In context, he’s not stating that he’s setting them free of the law, but of sin. He’s not stating they’ll be free of anything but slavery, and the law itself is not slavery, it’s covenant. This can be taken 2 ways, the person would not have any intention of violating the law, or that the law would not apply to them. Looking at how Jesus lead His life and taught, He Himself violated the law while instructing that King David violated the law and was blameless in the sight of God (Matt 12:4, Mark2:26 Luke 6:4) ---
**Author:** ![Todderbob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e47774/32.png) [@Todderbob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Todderbob)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/45 "2010-02-25T23:44:56Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > This can be taken 2 ways, the person would not have any intention of violating the law, or that the law would not apply to them. Looking at how Jesus lead His life and taught, He Himself violated the law while instructing that King David violated the law and was blameless in the sight of God. So we have one passage with ambiguous interpretation, which could be interpreted one way, or interpreted the other… And we have another passage in which Jesus is very specific that _none of the laws shall ever be invalid_. So, 1 ambiguous, 1 quite clear. ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/46 "2010-02-25T23:47:27Z")
That seems to be a theme in most religious works. Well, if you include throwing in the odd completely bonkers one, to mix things up. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2010, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/47 "2010-02-25T23:51:44Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > This can be taken 2 ways, the person would not have any intention of violating the law, or that the law would not apply to them. Looking at how Jesus lead His life and taught, He Himself violated the law while instructing that King David violated the law and was blameless in the sight of God (Matt 12:4, Mark2:26 Luke 6:4) Actually it can only be taken one way, unless you’re ignoring the text - he says, explicitly, that they would be freed from sin. Not law. Sin. “Law” isn’t even mentioned. Did you even read what you responded to? Or the bible? ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/48 "2010-02-26T00:00:40Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Actually it can only be taken one way, unless you’re ignoring the text - he says, explicitly, that they would be freed from sin. Not law. Sin. “Law” isn’t even mentioned. What is sin? ---
**Author:** ![Todderbob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e47774/32.png) [@Todderbob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Todderbob)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/49 "2010-02-26T00:04:56Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > What is sin? What they’re being freed from. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/50 "2010-02-26T00:06:27Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > What is sin? Trying to guess what you mean when you talk about religion is a tiresome chore at best-why don’t you just go ahead and tell us? ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/51 "2010-02-26T00:09:39Z")
Staying with the words of Jesus there is only once place I can find where Jesus defines how someone sins: [QUOTE=Revelation 2:14] Nevertheless, I have a few things against you: You have people there who hold to the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to entice the Israelites to sin by eating food sacrificed to idols and by committing sexual immorality. [/QUOTE] Where both of this violate the law ---
**Author:** ![Todderbob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e47774/32.png) [@Todderbob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Todderbob)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/52 "2010-02-26T00:20:36Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Staying with the words of Jesus there is only once place I can find where Jesus defines how someone sins: > Where both of this violate the law That’s a conversation Jesus is (will be) having. [See?](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+2&version=KJV) Are you saying that those are the only two things a person can do to sin? How about adultery? Are we cool with that? Oh, no, we shouldn’t do that, because according to Jesus (Matthew 5:27-32) even _thinking_ about adultery qualifies as committing adultery, and you should stab your own eye out. And God forbid (literally, see what I did there?) that you masturbate. Then you’ve got to cut your own hand off. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/53 "2010-02-26T00:28:56Z")
> [@Todderbob](#): > > That’s a conversation Jesus is (will be) having. > > [See?](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+2&version=KJV) > Are you saying that those are the only two things a person can do to sin? How about adultery? Are we cool with that? > Oh, no, we shouldn’t do that, because according to Jesus (Matthew 5:27-32) even _thinking_ about adultery qualifies as committing adultery, and you should stab your own eye out. And God forbid (literally, see what I did there?) that you masturbate. > > Then you’ve got to cut your own hand off. Actually there is no restriction ever on masturbation. That is the only place where I find where Jesus is quoted as saying what a sin actually is, and that applies to the Israelites, who were/are under the law. Staying with only the direct quotes of Jesus I do not know if I can make the case that for the Israelites breaking the law=sin, but I believe I easily could using the NT. ---
**Author:** ![Todderbob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e47774/32.png) [@Todderbob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Todderbob)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/54 "2010-02-26T00:31:40Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Actually there is no restriction ever on masturbation. > > That is the only place where I find where Jesus is quoted as saying what a sin actually is, and that applies to the Israelites, who were/are under the law. [Correct Link](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5&version=NIV) (sorry about that) 27"You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’[e] 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell. Are you really arguing about that context with me? You’re saying that immediately following the statements about adultery, the thing about your right hand _isn’t_ a masturbation reference? Sucks when the infidel atheist liberal Jew knows more about your religion than you do, hu? ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/55 "2010-02-26T00:37:36Z")
> [@Todderbob](#): > > [Correct Link](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5&version=NIV) (sorry about that) > 27"You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’[e] 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell. > > Are you really arguing about that context with me? You’re saying that immediately following the statements about adultery, the thing about your right hand _isn’t_ a masturbation reference? > > Sucks when the infidel atheist liberal Jew knows more about your religion than you do, hu? That was the first time I ever heard it said that way, and there was never stated any restriction on masturbation, and if one was thinking of their wife I could see no issue with it. The issue here if we take it as you did was the act of adultery, not masturbation. It is interesting that Jesus chose the ‘right’ eye, it would also seem that another part of the body would be the more direct one to cut off to solve that issue. ---
**Author:** ![akennett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee59a6/32.png) [@akennett](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/akennett)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/56 "2010-02-26T00:43:38Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > That was a quote of Jesus. Indeed, a quote where he is speaking to an audience of Jews who were following him (and hence probably following the Jewish laws). It has no relevance, then, to a discussion on if the rules apply to gentiles. ---
**Author:** ![Frank\_apisa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/47e85d/32.png) [@Frank\_apisa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank_apisa)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/57 "2010-02-26T00:49:45Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > As I think I have mentioned a few times, they weren’t talking about that aspect of the law - there was never any question that everyone had to obey the moral law. And I think I have mentioned that the moral aspects are the only parts that matter, because in discussions with theists that is the area where controversy arises. I have never had a discussion with any Christian who tries to divorce Christianity from the Old Testament because of dietary differences or circumcision. The most frequent points of contention that brings out the “we are no longer subject to Old Testament rules” are homosexuality and slavery. > [@](#): > > Jews, Gentiles, God-fearers - all of them. The only thing they were discussing was if Gentile Christians had to keep the ceremonial part of Jewish law circumcision, eating kosher, washing their hands and the vessels they used, etc. > Not any of the ceremonial or civic parts - otherwise, as you say, they would have mentioned those parts. > My experience is otherwise. There was even an episode of _The West Wing_ that did the “if you are going to argue against homosexuality why don’t you keep kosher” thing that went about in an e-mail a while back. > None, as I think I have mentioned eight or ten times. > I have not said this, I do not intend to say this. No one in the thread has said this. I have stated more than once that I do not believe this. Well…it is true whether you “believe” it or not. > [@](#): > > I have a feeling that you have an argument that only works if someone says this. If so, you are S.O.L. Well, if you want to insist that the issue comes up when kosher problems arise or when circumcision is discussed rather than the moral issues…you are certainly free to do so. This entire discussion arose from something Tom Tildrum said in another thread. He wrote: “Well, yes, if we’re going to be strictly literal about it, it would be more precise to say that the covenant between God and humanity set forth in the New Testament is very different from the one set forth in the Old. Most of the rules of Leviticus, for instance, have been superseded.” I granted that dietary rules and circumcision were changed…but I said nothing else changed…and certainly “most of the rules of Leviticus” do apply. All the moral ones apply according to you. > [@](#): > > Keeping in mind what I have already said a couple of times - Jesus said that the greatest and first commandment (meaning the most important moral rule) was “you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your mind and all your strength”, and that the second most important commandment was like the first one - “you shall love your neighbor as you love yourself”. And the guy He was talking with in one version of the story - an expert in Mosaic law - agreed that these two commandments were more important than the system of sacrifices set up im Mosaic law. Not sure what that has to do with our discussion here…but I still say that the attempts by Christians to disassociate themselves from the god of the Old Testament (which is really what they are doing) is nonsense. > [@](#): > > **Diogenes the Cynic** would disagree with you there - he has been very insistent that the passages in Leviticus (and the New Testament) do not establish a general prohibition against homosex. I am saying that the passage in Leviticus indicates that the god of the Bible considers homosexual activity to be an abomination. (Some might argue that the activity only covers homosexual activity among men….but whatever.) If Diogenes is saying that I am wrong on the issue…let him discuss it with me. Here is the passage again: “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” Leviticus 20:13 If that does not indicate that the god of the Bible considers homosexual activity (at least among men) to be an abomination…I’d like to hear the arguments against it. ---
**Author:** ![Frank\_apisa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/47e85d/32.png) [@Frank\_apisa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank_apisa)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/58 "2010-02-26T00:52:15Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > As a liberal Christian, I must say **Shodan** has been answering the questions fairly. As an agnostic, I also think Shodan has responded to the questions fairly, intelligently, and courteously. I am enjoying my conversations with him immensely…and although we disagree in significant areas, I hope it continues here in this thread and in others. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![Frank\_apisa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/47e85d/32.png) [@Frank\_apisa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank_apisa)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/59 "2010-02-26T00:57:45Z")
> [@CJJ](#): > > Jesus does say that not one iota or apex from the law (ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου) shall perish (παρέλθῃ) until all is accomplished (πάντα γένηται). > > There are three points worth considering in the text: (1) The emphasis is on the written text–the “iota” and “dot”–of the νόμον–a word which in the GNT often refers to the Mosaic law. In the next verse the word is ἐντολῃ, well translated as “commandment” but also of a somewhat different character than the more general νόμον (I’m not saying the word isn’t used to refer to parts of the OT law, but it is undoubtedly a different word); (2) using “perish” here places the emphasis on the perseverence of the law, rather than Jesus’s desire to avoid it’s destruction; it could be easily read the same way as Jesus’ comment “you will always have the poor among you” (Mk 14:7)–not as a recommendation but as a statement of fact; (3) “all is accomplished” can refer to the end of all things/the world (other idioms are more often used in Koine to mean this, but it’s possible) or to the end of his mission on earth. > > I don’t mean to belabor the text so much, but the point is it can be fairly (but, I agree, not definitively) interpreted to mean Jesus was changing at least the status of the Mosaic law. And since this notion more neatly matches up with his actions (Jesus is constantly ridiculing the Pharisees for their hidebound legalism), Christians have IMO fairly interpreted it this way. As others have pointed out, many other portions of the NT would be hard to reconcile with the idea that Jesus advocated keeping the OT law. Christians, of course, have found many ways to explain logical inconsistencies, but in this case at least the original Koine offers them some justification. If the best Jesus could do in trying to say he was here to change the law…is to say: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets. I have come, not to abolish them, but to fulfill them. Of this much I assure you; UNTIL HEAVEN AND EARTH PASS AWAY, not the smallest letter of the law, not the smallest part of a letter shall be done away with until it all comes true.” Matthew 5:17ff …then he probably should not have been teaching at all. If he actually meant this to mean “I am here to change the Law” then he was incompetent. Not sure how else to deal with this. I am not a scholar in the language…and you defining the passage to mean the exact opposite of what it appears to say. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2010, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384/60 "2010-02-26T01:31:28Z")
[QUOTE=Matt 5] 17"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. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=John 19:30] When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit. [/QUOTE] Jesus came to fulfill the law, which remained in effect till ‘everything is accomplished’, on the cross Jesus proclaimed ‘it is finished’ Could that mean that it was fulfilled at that time? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-the-laws-of-the-old-testament-apply-to-christians/530384.md?page=4)