Which OT parts to follow

  • Thread starter Thread starter aball1035
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

aball1035

Guest
I always hear people saying about Old Testament rules and laws either
  1. “Oh, you don’t have to follow that since it only was obligatory before Jesus”
or
  1. “Well, since it’s in the Bible you must follow it”
How does one differentiate between which rules to follow in the OT?
 
aball1035 said:
I always hear people saying about Old Testament rules and laws either
  1. “Oh, you don’t have to follow that since it only was obligatory before Jesus”
or
  1. “Well, since it’s in the Bible you must follow it”
How does one differentiate between which rules to follow in the OT?
Click to expand...
With the Church, the community of believers.
 
aball1035 said:
I always hear people saying about Old Testament rules and laws either
  1. “Oh, you don’t have to follow that since it only was obligatory before Jesus”
or
  1. “Well, since it’s in the Bible you must follow it”
How does one differentiate between which rules to follow in the OT?
Click to expand...
Of the old testament laws which we are to follow, stick to the 10 commandments, or the 2 summarizing commandments given in the NT by Christ. “Love God with all your heart, soul and mind” and “love your neighbour”. If you do these things you will follow the full 10 commandments subconciously.

most other laws from the OT do not need to be followed.

The statements you suggested above can be dangerously uninformed. We must follow the basic Laws of God, and they do NOT change, so laws of the OT are to be respected, interpreted, studied. Application may not be nessecery for some laws, but the so called “constitutory laws”, the 10 commandments, are nessecery to follow, as well as anything that is also in line with the teachings of Christ(that Christ may not have commented on in Scripture), remembering that he was indeed Jewish and did not simply discard the past, but reinterpreted it.

the problem with the second one is clear, it’s nothing but Bible Fundamentalism, and it isn’t a teaching of Christ, or the apostles. It’s a development of the 16th century idea of “Sola Scriptura”.
 
Read Acts 15 - the Biblical account of the Council of Jerusalem, which was called to address precisely this question - must Gentile converts keep the whole of the Law?

The Council took a very minimalist approach. They also set the pattern for “applying the faith to a changing world.” Jesus had promised to send the Holy Spirit to teach the apostles all they needed to know. The report of the Council began “It seems good to the Holy Spirit and to us . . .”

Down through the ages Christians have relied upon the guidance of the Holy Spirit promised to the apostles to deal with these questions as they arise.

Of course after the split in Christianity you get more disputes, as various people follow their own interpretations - returning to the Saturday Sabbath, or abstaining from pork, or otherwise re-embracing parts of the Law. Others have gone the other way, rejecting parts of the Law that the Church has maintained.

Ultimately this is part of the faith - believing that the Lord established an authority to teach us what we would need to know.
 
aball1035 said:
I always hear people saying about Old Testament rules and laws either
  1. “Oh, you don’t have to follow that since it only was obligatory before Jesus”
or
  1. “Well, since it’s in the Bible you must follow it”
How does one differentiate between which rules to follow in the OT?
Click to expand...
The 10 Commandments.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top