C
Contrabass101
Guest
Also, reading through some of the critique of OT-morals, I notice people keep quoting from Deutoronomy.
A good place to start to understand such quotes, would be asking, what Deutoronomy means, and why it has gotten that name in the first place.
Deutero-nomy means “Second Law”. Moses got three Laws at Sinai, one was a moral law, God’s will for his people - roughly the ten commandments, another was the ceremonial laws (levite-icus), and then there was the Deuteronomy.
Deutoronomy is second not only in being revealed later, but in importance. Obviously, God’s people needed to know what God’s will for their lives were, and they got that - the ten commandments in Exodus 20, which are God’s revealed will for all times. Then after falling into idolatry, God instituted (as chasticement) the Levitical law - primarily to force the Israelites to slaughter the animals they had been worshipping. This law was never intended to last forever.
Thirdly, there was a need for a civil law. It is impossible and indesirable to create a society whose civil laws equal the moral law completely - it would be Big Brother (I’m talking about the book “1984” not the tv-show
). You can’t convict a man for having “coveted his neighbourg’s donkey”, or any such “thought-crime”, yet any serious moral system must forbid not only covetous thoughts but also hateful, lustful and selfish thoughts. The civil law must have lower standards for the people as a whole, than the moral law has for the individual, further it may have a say in matters on which the moral law is silent (i.e. speed limits, taxes, legal processes…). Thus divorce would be allowed, but not moral by any means - it is forbidden by the 6th commandment. And eating shrimps would be violating the civil law (which was intended to seperate Israel from it’s neighbourgs culturally) but wouldn’t go against any moral absolute.
Something can be lawful without being morally right, and something can be forbidden without being morally wrong (of course breaking the law is under normal circumstances itself a moral wrong, but not always).
This is the “Second Law” of Deuteronomy, given to one specific people at one specific point of time, and never intended to be neither universal nor eternal.
As a rule of thumb, the stuff in Leviticus and Deuteronomy is of little or no importance in the question of Christian ethics.
A good place to start to understand such quotes, would be asking, what Deutoronomy means, and why it has gotten that name in the first place.
Deutero-nomy means “Second Law”. Moses got three Laws at Sinai, one was a moral law, God’s will for his people - roughly the ten commandments, another was the ceremonial laws (levite-icus), and then there was the Deuteronomy.
Deutoronomy is second not only in being revealed later, but in importance. Obviously, God’s people needed to know what God’s will for their lives were, and they got that - the ten commandments in Exodus 20, which are God’s revealed will for all times. Then after falling into idolatry, God instituted (as chasticement) the Levitical law - primarily to force the Israelites to slaughter the animals they had been worshipping. This law was never intended to last forever.
Thirdly, there was a need for a civil law. It is impossible and indesirable to create a society whose civil laws equal the moral law completely - it would be Big Brother (I’m talking about the book “1984” not the tv-show
Something can be lawful without being morally right, and something can be forbidden without being morally wrong (of course breaking the law is under normal circumstances itself a moral wrong, but not always).
This is the “Second Law” of Deuteronomy, given to one specific people at one specific point of time, and never intended to be neither universal nor eternal.
As a rule of thumb, the stuff in Leviticus and Deuteronomy is of little or no importance in the question of Christian ethics.
- CB