Which Old Testament Rules Apply to Christians?

Summary

Summary prepared by Acts 2:38 Life from the transcript below — the preacher’s words follow in full.

The whole Bible is for us — and the two commandments summarize it

• The question posed (in the host's frame): the old testament includes various commands, that most would say are not applicable today — the laws the frame names are of the kind bernard himself recaps (separating the types of grain, and distinguishing between clean and unclean animals) — while other commands, in the same chapter, all say do apply. How do we know whether an old testament passage is applicable to us today, or whether it was only for people that were living under the old testament law? The answer: let me begin by saying: the whole bible is given for us. So first corinthians (the chapter as he gives it) says: all the things that happen in the old testament are examples for us. So every teaching in the bible — including the teachings you mentioned, in the old testament — have relevance, have significance. They are the word of god. They have meaning for us. At the same time, we recognize that we're not living under the old covenant, which we find in the old testament. But we're living under the new covenant, which was instituted by the death, burial, and resurrection of jesus christ. So we're directly accountable, for the teachings of the new covenant. Now, to answer your question: we see what the new testament itself says. For example, in matthew (the chapter as he gives it), also in mark (the chapter as he gives it) — and there's a parallel passage in luke, as well — jesus was asked: what is the greatest commandment of all? And of course, that was given when there was no written new testament (a fused caption timestamp fragment is struck from this sentence by the recorded fix). The only bible was the old testament. So in a way, they're asking your question. And according to traditional jewish teaching, the old testament had 613 commands to obey. Jesus said: the first commandment is — hear, o israel, the lord our god is one. Love god, with all your heart, soul, mind, strength. The second commandment is like it: love your neighbor, as yourself (love your fellow human, as heard). He said: on these two commandments summarize all the law and the prophets ('on the these two commandments', as heard). So everything in the old testament can be summarized, with those two statements. You'll also find the apostle paul, writing essentially the same thing, in romans (the chapter as he gives it) — when he lists a number of old testament commands, and then he summarizes it: it's all summarized, in the law of love. James also talks about: everything is covered, by the royal law of love. So I think, in a broad sense, we can say: we're under the new covenant, not the old covenant. So things that were specifically given to the people of the old covenant — namely, the nation of israel — while they're instructive for us, they're not directly commanded to us. But anything that's covered by loving god and loving people — or, we might say, the moral law — then that is part of god's plan for humans. And so that would be true, under any covenant.

Scriptures: Leviticus 19:19; 1 Corinthians 10; Matthew 22; Mark 12; Romans 13; James (book-only)

Types and shadows, fulfilled in Christ

• So the kind of things you're talking about, that would not apply: we might use the term, the ceremonial law. Or the new testament speaks about a shadow — types and shadows. So a type is something that has — it's a real thing. A real place, person, event, practice, in the old testament, that had a significance for the new testament. So it has a teaching, far beyond the circumstances of that time. So we also see this in colossians (the chapter as he gives it): these things were shadows, but the body is christ. Here's the illustration. Let's say you're sitting at the corner of a building. And you see somebody's walking, around the corner. You haven't seen them yet, but they're casting their shadow ahead ('casting their shadow head up', as heard). So you look at him, say: is that a man, or a woman? Look in the shadow: is that an adult, or a child? And then suddenly, the person rounds the corner. You see them. Well, you don't have to keep looking at the shadow, to see who they are. You look straight at the body. And you say: well, here's the person. I know they are. So some of these things — teachings of the old testament — are shadows, that point toward greater truth. Now we have the greater truth, of the new testament. We no longer need to follow the shadows. Galatians (the chapter as he gives it) says: the law was a schoolmaster, tutor, to bring us to christ. But now that we have christ, we don't still need the schoolmaster. So, in other words: there are some teachings of the old testament, that were preparing the way for jesus, and pointing to jesus. But have been fulfilled, in jesus. So now that we have the reality, we don't need the shadow. We don't — now that we have the fulfillment, we don't need the type. So what are we talking about? A classic example would be the animal sacrifices (the delivered file carries a book-heading artifact fused into this sentence, struck by the recorded fix and disclosed on the record). When people sinned, or violated the law, they were supposed to offer animal sacrifice. Well, the new testament explains that jesus christ has become our supreme sacrifice. The one sacrifice, for all sin, forever. So we don't offer animal sacrifices, because they're fulfilled in christ. Some of the laws you mention — of separating the types of grain, and also distinguishing between clean and unclean animals — the new testament indicates that these things were teaching us, the principle of separation. In other words: the ancient israelites — god was trying to show them: in your clothes, in your farming practices, in your diet, in your daily life, in the days of the week — the day that you set aside — all that was designed to teach: there's a difference, between what is holy, and what is not holy. And so, in all of your life: don't just do whatever you want to do. But first ask: what is god's will? Some things god wants us to do. Some things god doesn't want us to ('some things god wants to do, something god doesn't want us to', as the sentence stands). So it's like a child — like a tutor, teaching children: you got to learn to ask the question: is this the will of god, or not? Is this holy, or not? Is this god's plan, or not? Is this my identification, as a child of god, or not? So once that lesson is learned, now we come to the new testament. And god shows us: it applies, to his moral commands. So we're no longer obligated, to the dietary laws of the old testament, or the sabbath laws of the old testament. Although we should have a principle of a day of rest. And also a principle of assembling for worship, weekly, at least. But all those detailed laws have been fulfilled, by the reality.

Scriptures: Colossians 2; Galatians 3

The questions to ask — and the creation principle

• So go back to your root question: how do we know the difference? Well, here's some questions to ask. Is this related to loving god, and loving people? Is this related to god's moral law? If so, it will always be true: before the law of moses, during the law of moses, after the law of moses. Another way to look at it is: is this a ceremony, or type ('a ceremony or tight', as heard), that's been fulfilled in christ, and in the church? If so, what is the fulfillment? We have to see a fulfillment, that's greater than the type. So the animal sacrifice is: yes, the cross. That's an easy one. But you have to see: there must be a fulfillment, that we do still follow, that's greater than the type. A third point might be: what was god's plan, for the human race, before sin? In the book of genesis, that would seem to carry over — whether it's the old covenant, or the new covenant. Jesus, for example, in matthew (the chapter as he gives it): they — the people — ask him: well, what are the grounds for divorce? He says: wait a minute, you shouldn't be asking that question. Because in the beginning, god didn't really plan for divorce. And so they were saying: well, why did the law of moses — the old covenant — allow it? He says: because the hardness of your hearts. Because of sin, he was trying to regulate evil. Men were putting away their wives ('men were putting with their wives', as heard). So he's at least trying to give some regulation, of what's proper and improper. And protect the rights of the woman. But in the beginning, god didn't intend for you to ever have to get that far. He intended for the marriage to work. So in the beginning, he created one man, one woman. They were committed, joined together, for life. That's god's plan. So if you want to know what's god's plan: that's what it is. But later, because of sin, god's plan wasn't completely fulfilled. And so god gave some lesser commands. But if you really want to know the truth (a fused caption timestamp fragment is struck from this sentence's lead-in by the recorded fix): go back to the beginning. And so that same principle can apply.

Scriptures: Matthew 19

The worked example — distinction between male and female

• I'll give you a very practical example. Deuteronomy (the verse as he gives it) talks about: a man should not wear a woman's clothes. A woman should not wear a man's clothes. And those who violate this: it's an abomination, unto god. So a lot of people say: oh, that's just an old testament command. You can pick and choose. Other commands, in the same chapter, the same book, that we obviously don't follow. So we're not obligated. Of course — as you pointed out (as the sentence's letters run) — well, we can pick other commands, in that same chapter, in that book, that we definitely, absolutely follow. So how do you know? Well, here's a good example. Is it related to loving god, loving people, and god's moral law? Well, the very terms: if you violate this, it's an abomination unto god — which means something god detests. So that indicates — as for the dietary laws, he would say: now, don't eat pork. That shall be an abomination to you. You shall despise it. But when he says: don't cross the genders, because god despises that — well, that indicates it's moral law. So that would be one test. Second test: well, does this go back to god's original plan? Well, go back to genesis (the pinpoint as he gives it): god created male and female, absolutely. And then here, under the law: make sure there's a distinction, in dress ('a distinction address', as heard). Another question: well, is it still under the new covenant? Well, actually, yes. The new covenant does talk about: sex morality, distinction between male and female, against same-sex relationships, and even effeminate dress, effeminate behavior — in first corinthians (the chapter as he gives it). But then, very specifically, in first corinthians (the next chapter as he gives it): distinction between male and female, in the outward appearance, in the form of hair. And of course, first timothy (the chapter as he gives it): the woman wearing modest clothing, which indicates a feminine form of clothing, that's appropriate. So actually, the new testament does reiterate the teaching, in very basic form. And then finally, you ask: well, could this be a type, or shadow? If so, what does it point to? What is the greater truth? What is the abiding truth, that we still follow? So: distinction between male and female — if that's abolished, what's it replaced by? And the fact is: it's not replaced by anything. It's the abiding truth. So I've just given you four examples. Does it involve loving god, loving people? Does it involve god's moral law? If so, it remains. Is it a creation principle? If so, it remains. Is it reiterated in the new testament? If so, it remains. Is it a type, that's fulfilled by something greater? If so, what is that something greater? If there's nothing greater, then that's a good indication it remains. So those are four practical — I guess, questions — you could ask, to know: is what is stated here, in the old testament, something that's specifically god's will? So obviously: when god told noah to build an ark, he's not telling us to build an ark. So yes, of course, there are historical commands, specific to a person, or to a time. But also many of those teachings — you can tell, by the four questions I've asked, or the four guidelines I've given — that have abiding relevance, for the church today. And in general, we should assume: the whole bible is teaching us. And certainly what we find in the new testament is directly to the church, today.

Scriptures: Deuteronomy 22:5; Genesis 1; 1 Corinthians 6; 1 Corinthians 11; 1 Timothy 2

Scripture index: Leviticus 19:19; 1 Corinthians 10; Matthew 22; Mark 12; Romans 13; James (book-only); Colossians 2; Galatians 3; Matthew 19; Deuteronomy 22:5; Genesis 1; 1 Corinthians 6; 1 Corinthians 11; 1 Timothy 2.