This is more of a GQ, really, but I put it here because it obviously has no single, absolute answer and might be controversial.
So what biblical or similar laws are Christians supposed to follow? What kind of schools of thought exist, who adheres to them and what theological justification do they have?
Off the top of my head, I can think of Jesus’ two commandments (love God, love thy neighbour) alone, and of the laws laid out in the Old Testament plus Jesus’ commandments, or all of the above plus Paul etc in the New Testament. A poster in this thread, Finagle, suggests that Christians are compelled to follow only the Noahide laws. So what’s the story?
You haven’t covered them all. There are also the dietary laws set out in the Acts of the Apostles, that Christians have used to avoid the Jewish dietary laws.
But Christ said that “not a jot or a tittle of the Law will pass away…”, so you could argue that Christians ought to follow all the rules.
I’m sure you can find a way to justify anything. When I was a kid we had to asvoid meat on Friday, and that doesn’t even have a scriptural basis. It’s so much easier being agnostic.
There is no official, universal set of laws for all Christians. It’s pretty much an interpretive, denominational thing. For some, all you have to do is repent and accept Jesus, for some, you have to be baptized, for some you have to follow the Noahide laws. Some groups of so-called “Messianic Jews” basically follow Mosaic law and even keep kosher.
There is nothing in the NT that outlines a set of rules and regulations or anything, and more than a little of what is suggested as to how Christians should live (living in poverty, living in communes without private ownership of property, paying taxes without complaint, pacifism, women keeping silent, slaves obeying their masters, etc.) is more or less ignored.
I’m aware that I didn’t cover the field of potential biblical sources of law, and also that there’s no one authoritative or official answer.
I guess what I’m interested in is the concept of some, generally more conservative / evangelical Christians, that the Old Testament applies entirely or in large part to Christians and others today. All that Leviticus stuff that gets brought up in support of arguments against tolerance of homosexuals, that kind of thing. Where does that all come from, and what do more lefty modern Christians think about the authoritativeness of such halakha law?
It just basically comes from theological differences, that is why there are so many different Christian denominations.
Some Christians believe somet hings, others believe different. It’s hard to even generalize about right/left when it comes to Christiand denominations. There are literally just a huge number of sects, some of them very small and highly specific in what they believe. A large percentage of modern Christians, both on the left and right, don’t give much weight to halakha law.
Talk about varied beliefs. Some Christians believe you shouldn’t dance. Some drink alcohol some don’t. Some believe playing a musical instrument in during church services is sinful. Some believe all swearing is awful while others just try not to use the Lords name in vain.
I like Jesus response about the first two commandments. If you sincerely and continuously try to do those two, then all the rest is just details. Everything else springs from those two.
I’d be interested in some elaboration of the “New Covenent” Christians sometimes mention. I’ve heard this used to justify why the Jewish dietary laws don’t apply. Is there scriptural support for this “new covenent” concept, and/or a description of what is and is not included in it? Why is eating pork allowed, yet, for many Christians, homosexuality is still bad?
Actually, I think one of the main points of Jesus’ ministry was that people were getting too tied up in the fine points of the law to the point where it defied common sense. I don’t have cites handy, but look at where He’s chided for gathering food on the Sabbath or when He was asked about the woman who was married multiple times. When Christ was asked which the most important Commandment was, He said, (bear with me here; I’m working from memory) “Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God, with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy mind. This is the first and greatest commandment and the second is like unto it. Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.” In my own, sometimes unorthodox take on Christianity, these are the two laws against which I must measure my every action. These are the two laws I must obey above all others.
I has been explained to me that some of those laws are “ceremonial laws,” (no pork) which Christians don’t have to follow, and some are “moral laws,” (no murder) which still apply. Haven’t yet heard how one determines which category a specific law fits into, though.
Well, Jesus talks a lot about the law in Matthew 15. In verses 10 through 20, He can be read as specifically doing away with dietary restrictions. Here’s the passage:
Taking this in context with the rest of the chapter and with the rest of Jesus’s teachings, I’d say that going through Jewish law and saying “A applies but B doesn’t” is missing the point. Earlier in the chapter, Christ speaks about those who pay lip service to the Commandment “Honor thy father and mother” yet say to them “Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God” thus breaking the Commandment while keeping the strict letter of the law. One’s actions must be measured the entire law and priorities set based on the guidelines I mentioned in my last post.
It’s not about nitpicking the law; Christ specifically speaks against that. Rather, it’s about looking at one’s actions in the context of the entire law as summed up by Jesus and seeing how one’s actions fit them. Last year, an old friend of mine who happens to be a Wiccan moved in with me for a while when his wife divorced him. There are some Christians who’d say I continue to sin by associating with a non-Christian whom I’m highly unlikely to convert. There are some people who’d say I sinned by allowing a man to move in with me since I’m a single woman. On the other hand, there is that whole “Love your neighbor as yourself” business and in Matthew 25, Christ speaks about inviting strangers in, let alone friends.
It’s dead early in the morning here. Is any of this making sense?
CJ
Chapter 15, the Book of Acts of the Apostles – the first “Council of Jerusalem”:
(In the more traditional KJV version, substitute “fornication” for “sexual immorality”)
Many Christians, based upon this passage, conclude that since the Apostles did not provide a new, Christian definition of “sexual immorality”/“fornication”, then the sexual prohibitions from the old Law should still apply. Other interpreters of Scripture argue that the reference is to the conduct in the context of Pagan sexual rituals and not to Bruce and Derek sharing a flat in the East Village, but you can see how things can get there if you’re a literalist. (BTW, if I understand correctly Jehovah’s Witnesses use the Council of Jerusalem rules as justification for their rejection of blood transfusions.)
