Mosaic Law and the NT Believer

Can anyone recommend a Logos resource that discusses the relationship between Mosaic Law and the NT believer?

Many times I see people pulling out support for their position using a portion of the Pentatuch (e.g. Tithing, Incest, Lending etc.), yet they reject other laws as being cultural. I am looking for a cogent set of arguments concerning different interpretation models.

BTW, if there is a good resource that you are aware of, but it isn't in Logos, I would appreciate knowing about that as well, we can always turn it into a suggestion.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

JimTowler

Acts and Galatians?

I did a search in my library for "Mosaic Law" and this was one of the first few hits below:

2 The first grave difficulty which threatened the unity of the early Church was the question whether Gentiles desirous to become Christians need or need not first accept Judaism and the Mosaic Law. How acute the conflict was can only be thoroughly understood by examining the Epistle to the Galatians¹, in which Paul vindicates, against the claims of the Judaisers, the right of Gentile converts to complete liberty from the bondage of the law. The same catholic view is markedly maintained throughout the Acts. The great feature of Apostolic work is to bear "witness" to Jesus and the resurrection, and by so doing to produce that "belief in the Lord Jesus" which is the one requisite for admission into His Church, of which admission baptism is the visible sign, and the gift of the Holy Spirit the convincing proof. The message of Jesus is not for Jews or Jewish proselytes alone; it is to all, and for all, offered on the simplest terms, and limited by the fewest restrictions.

Page, T. E. (1886). The Acts of the Apostles. London: Macmillan.

BillS

Hi Terry,

By Mosaic Law do you mean the moral law? Or do you mean the ceremonial law--the 3100+ laws that included moral law?

If moral law, surely a resource that discusses the sermon on the mount should be included... "you have heard that it was said" [insert quote from mosaic law here] "but I say" [insert Jesus' interpretation here] ... along with His words in Matthew 5:17...

If moral law, Pink's Exposition of the Sermon on the Mount may help... as might Boice's Sermon on the Mount: an Expositional Commentary. or any other commentary that addresses Matthew 5-7.

In addition, you'll find material on a believer's position re ceremonial law in books or commentaries that cover Peter's & Paul's conflicts with the Judaizers. For instance, Farrar's The Life & Work of St. Paul has material on the conflicts that resulted in Paul's visit to Jerusalem to clarify what parts of the ceremonial law to apply to new Gentile believers (book VI Chap XXII).

Blessings on your search!

Alan Macgregor

Terry,

Good question. You can go as deep as you want with this one!

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament vol. 4 p1059ff has a good starter discussion.

Also Carson & Beale: Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament has a good section on Galatians. Any of the commentaries on Galatians must deal with this as it is fundamental to Paul's argument.

These are both available in Logos (You may already have them.)

Terry Poperszky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131162#Comment_131162

Jim, I guess that no matter how many books you have, there are always some that you are missing.

I don't seem to have anything by Page in my library, but I think I get the gist of his argument.

Bill, Moral vs. Ceremonial is a categorization that I hadn't considered, and I am not sure I understand myself since some of the legal requirements seem to fit both categories (IMHO). Let me expand on the reason for the question. I am getting ready to teach Malachi, in which is a section of scripture that is often used to obligate NT believers to follow an OT legal requirement (i.e. Tithing). Yet, in that same section, God says that not bringing in the offerings that are required in the Mosiac Law are tantamount to robbing him as well, but I have yet to hear someone saying that offerings (e.g. First fruits, wave, drink etc.) are still required of NT believers.

So, what I am trying to do, is present them with a schema that will allow for consistent interpretation, and allow them to decide for them selves when they read or hear from the pulpit something of this nature.

Both you and Jim have given me a good direction with reference to the Judiazers and the Acts council and I need to think more about how to incorporate it.

Terry Poperszky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131172#Comment_131172

Good question. You can go as deep as you want with this one!

Thanks Alan, I do have both of those, I was just overwhelmed with 2K+ hits on the search and was looking for a little help in winnowing.

JimTowler

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131176#Comment_131176

I don't seem to have anything by Page in my library, but I think I get the gist of his argument.

Its http://www.logos.com/ebooks/details/CCGNT_ACTS which is included in the high-end packages, or you can buy it by itself.

I got to say, I'm not sure I ever opened it before just a while ago. It was one of the first hits in my list of 3,500 and many many pages of results.

I had first attempted to see if I had anything with law or mosaic etc in the titles. Nothing much stood out, and its not something I can remember any titles.

Sorry if I gave a bit of a light-hearted and off-hand response. It just seemed a great quote I'd found.

Seems many of the letter in the NT were written to deal with issues and questions. Same with the great Councils etc down thru Church History.

You got more hits than me: I got only 10, but then I can't spell, just like the editors of the works below [:)]

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131176#Comment_131176

Bill, Moral vs. Ceremonial is a categorization that I hadn't considered,

(not being flippant with this comment:) some don't consider it a viable categorization, since it is not only not a Biblically explicit categorization, but some laws might fall in several categories. I grew up WITH the categorization, but have moved away from it in recent years.

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131194#Comment_131194

I agree with Jim, that you would do well to dig into Biblical passages and wrestle with them as much as looking at other resources. That said, the IVP Reference dictionaries will broach the subject, and at least give you parameters of study and an outline of key hermeneutical camps. (everything from Reconstructionism to "we're just NT people!" [A])

J.R. Miller

Can anyone recommend a Logos resource that discusses the relationship between Mosaic Law and the NT believer?

Here are a few excerpts and links to resources that had consistent hits over a variety of searches I did on this topic.

Systematic Theology

(10) Matthew 5:17–20’s emphasis on the eternal validity of the Old Testament law conflicts, says Barr, with the New Testament affirmation that Jesus Christ fulfills the Mosaic law. But biblical scholars have long stressed that while Jesus Christ does indeed fulfill the law of Moses in its totality for sinners, yet that selfsame law continues valid as an expression of the eternal moral character of God. Barr emphasizes “the critical character of Jesus’ use of the Old Testament” (Fundamentalism, p. 82).

Carl Ferdinand Howard Henry, vol. 4, God, Revelation, and Authority (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 1999), 364.

http://www.logos.com/products/details/

Old Stuff

Anyone who, like the enthusiasts, erects Mosaic law as a biblical-divine requirement does injury to the preaching of Christ. Just as the Judaizers of old, who would have required circumcision as an initial requirement, so also the enthusiasts and radicals of this later era do not see that Christ is the end of the Mosaic law. For all the stipulations of that law, insofar as they go beyond the natural law, have been abolished by Christ. The Ten Commandments are binding upon all men only so far as they are implanted in everyone by nature. In this sense Luther declares that “Moses is dead.”

Besides, the Jewish assembly of Sinai and of the decalogue has been replaced by the Christian congregation of Pentecost and of the new covenant. The era of Mosaic law extends from Sinai to Pentecost. In this era the Jewish people served its particular purpose, for this people, alone among all the peoples, was during that time span both state and church. It was just one national ethnic group among others on earth, but at the same time it was a peculiar people set apart for God as an instrument of his plan for all peoples.

Martin Luther, vol. 35, Luther's Works, Vol. 35 : Word and Sacrament I, ed. Jaroslav Jan Pelikan, Hilton C. Oswald and Helmut T. Lehmann, Luther's Works (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1999), 158-59.

http://www.logos.com/products/details/1663

The law as a rule of life you can divide in a threefold manner—the moral law, the civil law and the ceremonial law, that is, the certain great, fixed principles of morality, the special legislation for the life of the nation, and the laws governing the ceremonies and the ritual. Now I want to emphasise that the making of this subsidiary covenant with Moses on behalf of the children of Israel at Sinai in no way whatsoever interfered with the covenant of grace that had already been given to Abraham, and that had previously been hinted at in the Garden of Eden.

David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, God the Father, God the Son (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 1996), 232.

http://www.logos.com/products/details/2434

The Reformed have also stressed the continuing normativity of the Old Testament law, specifically, over the New Testament believer, Matt. 5:17–20. There is a controversy in Reformed circles over “theonomy,” which is essentially a controversy over how the OT law is to be used in the Christian life.¹³ Both “theonomists” and Reformed critics of theonomy agree that the Old Testament law has an important, edifying, governing role in the Christian life; both parties also agree that some OT commandments no longer are literally binding, because we now live in a different situation from that to which these commands were addressed. The argument is over which commands belong in which category. All Calvinists believe that the Old Testament laws are the Word of God and profitable for “teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work,” 2 Tim. 3:16–17.

Frame, John, “The Collected Shorter Theological Writings of john Frame”

http://www.logos.com/products/details/3586

Dictionaries

Covenant theologians have traditionally divided laws into three categories: moral, civil, and ceremonial. Moral laws (e.g., the Decalogue), based on the unchanging character of God, are eternally binding. Civil laws (e.g., Exod. 21–23), although they may illustrate moral law, were limited historically to the theocratic state of Israel and are not binding on the church. Ceremonial laws (e.g., sacrifices) were intended to prefigure Christ, and ceased to be applicable upon his first advent. A problem with this approach is that the categories “moral, civil, and ceremonial” are artificial. There is often a mixture of these categories: the ceremonial sabbath among “moral” laws (Exod. 20:8), ceremonial food regulations among “civil” laws (Exod. 21:28; 22:31), “moral” motivations in civil laws (Exod. 22:21, 26–27) and in cultic laws (Exod. 20:26). There is considerable subjectivity in labeling laws as “moral,” “civil,” or “ceremonial.”

Walter A. Elwell and Walter A. Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, electronic ed., Baker reference library; Logos Library System (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1997).

http://www.logos.com/ebooks/details/evdictbt

Terry Poperszky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131220#Comment_131220

Thanks for the responses, as I ponder the question I see a good chance of glazed looks and exploding heads in my SS class.

BTW, if anyone else has anything to add or advice on how to present this on a non-technical level, I would love to hear from you.

Anthony H

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131176#Comment_131176

Bill, Moral vs. Ceremonial is a categorization that I hadn't considered,

Terry, if you do start to look at it from the ceremonial side you might also take note that some of them were specific to to duty... in other word's the priest, levites might share a number of ceremonial laws and yet they would have some that were specific to each that the other was not required to follow. Likewise men as apposed to women, etc.

As was said above by others, it can "tree-out" into great detail or be broad-brush.

Interesting that this is a subject of interest as there seems to be a lot of similar topics in the forum recently... though maybe it's just that my attention to it has been.

Daniel Lee

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131238#Comment_131238

BTW, if anyone else has anything to add or advice on how to present this on a non-technical level, I would love to hear from you.

I'm not sure if you're doing a series or 1-3 lessons, but I might turn to Hebrews and point out the change of law discussion especially re: Jesus as high priest in Hebrews 7 (esp. 7:12) and the new covenant in Hebrews 8 (esp. 8:6, 13). Cf. Matthew 5:17-20, Christ fulfills the law, and given statements by Paul in Romans regarding us not being under law but under grace...then the natural question is "If I'm not under the OT Law, can I do whatever I want?" Paul would give an emphatic "No" in Romans 6:15-23 (see also Galatians and the issue of what constitutes salvation). What then guides us? The law of Christ (Galatians 6:1-5; James 1:25) - commands given by Christ and the apostles, as well as principles derived from their teaching.

A good comparison book is Five Views on Law and Gospel (part of the Zondervan Counterpoints series).

In Logos, I see A.W. Pink has The Law and the Christian (which I haven't read). I don't see a ton of other non-commentary resources, but I don't have my desktop Logos available at the moment. Hope that helps.

Daniel Lee

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131194#Comment_131194

Bill, Moral vs. Ceremonial is a categorization that I hadn't considered,

(not being flippant with this comment:) some don't consider it a viable categorization, since it is not only not a Biblically explicit categorization, but some laws might fall in several categories. I grew up WITH the categorization, but have moved away from it in recent years.

A related point is that in addition to certain laws not fitting the several categories neatly (moral, civil, ceremonial), there is a question if the Law can be subdivided (other than for purposes of study). This could be implied by the way the Law is referenced as a unity (ie "the law" vs. "the laws"). It might be parallel to the unity of God - we study his attributes individually but he is still one person. Perhaps not a valid comparison. Something to consider. I'll repost later if I have a good Logos source which addresses this topic; none come to mind at the moment.

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131250#Comment_131250

Terry, the following are some simple thoughts, somewhat random, perhaps points that would be helpful to a SS class.

The OT laws all spring from the 10 Commandments would can be boiled down to "Love God and Love your Neighbor. They spring from the character of God himself. The NT Christian, no matter what "stripe" he is, can ask himself: what do these laws tell us about the character of God? (concern for the disadvantaged, holiness and purity, love, etc)
Acts 15 (that I happen to be preaching on Sunday) describes a church council who have to wrestle with real world/real church issues regarding the inclusion of people who have traditionally not been followers of the Torah. Some Christians of Jewish heritage could not conceive that these Gentiles did not have to be circumcised first. That is the only way they had ever known to be God's people: it was a sign of their covenant. Well, the council decided that both experience (Peter/Cornelius) and scripture (Amos) looked to a time when God will call people to himself in a whole new way. Circumcision was no longer necessary. But faith was. Now there is question in 15:20 if the recommendation to "keep from meat polluted by idols" etc a concession to Jews (ie, let's have Gentiles follow some aspects of the law, especially in those cases where Jews and Gentiles mingle, so that the Jews won't be necessarily offended. On the other hand, those four items in the ruling might refer specifically to idol worship/practice, and has nothing to do with "Jewish sensibility.") Maybe you won't be equipped to answer all the questions, but you can point to the fact that something new was going on. And this new things was difficult for many believers to comprehend. But it centers on Christ.
Whether or not you break down things into "ceremonial" etc, you can point to Hebrews' constant point that Christ is the new covenant, the complete sacrifice--in himself he does away with all that was done before, those things just being "shadows." The old methods and requirements failed, and the old "heart" was the biggest failure, but God overcomes them all by fulfilling what we could not and be giving us what we could not produce (a new heart).
The Sermon on the Mount constantly points toward the deeper level of "law keeping": it is more than just external /letter of the law stuff--but it goes to the heart (adultery/lust; murder/anger.) It also shows us that we can DO "good things" but have our heart (motivation) all wrong and nullify that "law keeping."

Don't be so quick to systematize it all (I have no idea if you are reformed, unreformed, or whatever!) and let the class wrestle with the text and "what new thing" is going on.

Probably nothing new to you, but was just trying to break it down more simply.

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131268#Comment_131268

Terry, tho one poster blasted me in another thread for saying this--this study really can be like opening a 'can of worms." It brings up the issue of "continuity and discontinuity." And it is a hot button whether you are reconstructionist or dispensationalist or anything in between. You might know your own heritage and its general thrust, and perhaps you need to teach that. But I find it always helpful to let people wrestle with the text and ask questions like: "what is going on here? what is different? what is the same? why was this point brought up/why the controversy, etc." I try to do this long before stating a "party line." It helps people think rather than just going to the answers. And I have found myself at times moving away from my own "party line" because of the Biblical witness itself.

Blessings to you.

MJ. Smith

Can anyone recommend a Logos resource that discusses the relationship between Mosaic Law and the NT believer?

I would suggest that you start by searching for "mitzov" then follow the logic of the rabbis in the evolution of practice of the ceremonial mitzov after the destruction of the 2nd temple. Both the Jews after the destruction of the temple and the Christians separating from the temple/synagogue had similar exegetical problems.

The posts prior to mine don't mention either the ritual decalogue or Noahic law both of which have ramifications for your topic.

Pam Larson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131271#Comment_131271

It brings up the issue of "continuity and discontinuity."

Logos does have this title:

Johnson, S. L., & Feinberg, J. S. (1988). Continuity and discontinuity : Perspectives on the relationship between the Old and New Testaments : Essays in honor of S. Lewis Johnson, Jr. Westchester, Ill.: Crossway Books.

Here's the table of contents:

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131283#Comment_131283

correct, Pam! I have it, thank you for posting it. Beale is also the editor of "Commentary of the NT use of the OT" (in Logos) which will deal with OT quotations and allusions within the NT. That is also a good resource, albeit more indepth and scripture specific.

http://www.logos.com/ebooks/details/COMNTUSEOT

It's one of my "favs."

Terry Poperszky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131302#Comment_131302

Ok, now it is me that is getting glazed eyes and feeling a definite rise in cranial pressure. Thanks for all the references, this question really deserves a class all by itself. I think that I will keep it fairly simple, and state the issue and then let them work through it as we proceed through the book.

I appreciate all the Logos resource recommendations as well, I have most of them in my library and I am looking forward to doing more research for my personal edification.

Dan, I am not a big party line person, started out reformed, but currently a So.B. and disagree with their party line enough that I have chosen not to use their SS material. This study is based on inductive methodology, so any party lines are brought in only after a considerable time with the text.

M.J. I can't find any references to mitzov, did you by chance mean mitzvot?

Thanks again to all those that took the time to answer.

Anthony H

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131357#Comment_131357

M.J. I can't find any references to mitzov, did you by chance mean mitzvot?

If a mitzov (a good deed ? mitzvah) is a replacement of ritual, I think there are several phonetic spellings.... you might also try mitzvoth or mitzvah. Though I may be mixing several terms.

[Anthony Hamlin at 5:57 PM (GMT -8) on Fri, May 21 2010]

EDIT: I had some trouble finding mitzov in my L4. I got a hit for mitzvot in Semeia 86 under a footnote for "definitions of ritualization" p171 (ta’amei ha-mitzvot) and "the Mishnah's Ritualization of table talk in the Seder" p175 (mitzvot of the mouth).

Ken F Hill

a Logos resource that discusses the relationship between Mosaic Law and the NT believer?

The Jewish New Testament Commentary by David Stern might be useful.

Ken F Hill

if there is a good resource that you are aware of, but it isn't in Logos, I would appreciate knowing about that as well

I don't know if this would work in Logos, but I have found this site helpful: http://www.jcstudies.com/-- Center for Judaic-Christian Studies -- some books, articles, and audio.

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131357#Comment_131357

you're welcome, Terry. It is a very interesting study, one that has always captured me. [:)]

I have especially liked some works by Graeme Goldsworthy, but he is not in Logos. Also, Christopher J. H. Wright--also not much in Logos (only as a contributor to AYBD, etc, I think).

Jack Caviness

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131176#Comment_131176

I am getting ready to teach Malachi, in which is a section of scripture that is often used to obligate NT believers to follow an OT legal requirement (i.e. Tithing). Yet, in that same section, God says that not bringing in the offerings that are required in the Mosiac Law are tantamount to robbing him as well, but I have yet to hear someone saying that offerings (e.g. First fruits, wave, drink etc.) are still required of NT believers.

In this regard, you might want to develop principles from Malachi and then include Paul's teaching on giving in 1 Corinthians 16:1-4 and 2 Corinthians 8:1-9:15.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131361#Comment_131361

M.J. I can't find any references to mitzov, did you by chance mean mitzvot?

Yes, there are multiple transliterations and I may well have used the mix 'n match method of spelling which somehow isn't very useful for computer searches.[:$]

Jeremy

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131379#Comment_131379

I would highly recommend D.A. Carson's long section on Matthew 5:17 in the Expositor's Commentary.

Allen Browne

Great question, Terry. You've already got lots of answers, but I'd also like to recommend N T Wright's The New Testament and the People of God (in the Christian Origins and Question of God series.)

It's heavy reading, starting with epistemology (how do we know stuff?), placing us within the story of what God is doing, and facing the question in what sense story can be authoritative (and that's just the first 150 pages.) I suspect that those are questions you need to answer first, before you can get to the question you are actually asking.

HTH.

Alex Scott

I'm sure this will bring out the self-appointed cyber police, but the question was raised about the relationship between the Mosaic Law and the NT believer, and I think it deserves an answer even if it doesn't come directly from a Logos book.

It amazes me that theologians can so readily muddy the waters with their intellectual gymnastics in their attempts to make all the pieces fit. I think the first thing you have to decide is was Paul right when he said, categorically, "You are not under the law"? If he is right, then you are not under the law, and trying to accommodate the statement by breaking the law into various artificial parts (the Law is one law, not several), or by replacing it with another, the law of Christ, is futile. But what does it say? IF YOU ARE BEING LED BY THE SPIRIT, you are not under the law. As a Christian you have only two choices. If you are habitually following the leading of the Spirit (in reality - not just a theological truism) then you will produce the fruit of the spirit, and against these there is no law (Galatians 5:22,23). In other words, if you are walking in the spirit and producing the fruit of the spirit, then you are not under the law. But if you are not walking in the Spirit, and are habitually following the desires of the flesh, thereby producing the deeds of the flesh - those who practice these things WILL NOT inherit the kingdom of God.

Might as well stick my neck out re tithing too. I don't tithe because it is required, either under OT law or NT law. But rather I tithe as an act of worship, just as it was before the law came into force (Genesis 14). You don't believe in tithing? - fine, don't do it. I have to wonder what you're worshiping though.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131412#Comment_131412

Can anyone recommend a Logos resource that
discusses the relationship between Mosaic Law and the NT
believer?

[A]

Terry Poperszky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131412#Comment_131412

You don't believe in tithing? - fine, don't do it. I have to wonder what you're worshiping though.

Here in lies the rub with posts and why I so often get in trouble on this forum [;)]

Niether my wife or I believe tithing is a NT practice. Based on our understanding of God's Word, we believe that everything we own belongs to God, because we belong to God. Since it all belongs to Him, we each approach Him separately and seek his face in answer to what and where he wants us to give, when we both have an answer then we come back together and compare answers. In 12 years of marriage, we have had different answers only a handful of time, when this happens, we normally choose the higher amount. If God told us to give 10%, we would give 10% because he told us to, not because it was part of the Mosaic Law. Yes, I know that there is an instance of Abraham tithing on the spoils of war, I don't believe there is enough information there to postulate a general principle from that instance, especially since it looks nothing like the tithing of the OT.

From our personal experience, tithing is easy, giving everything to God is harder, and letting him control our time is the hardest thing of all.

Alex, that is how we worship in the Poperszky household.

[:D]

Now, that is the last thing I will say on the subject of tithing, I said it because I didn't want people to misunderstand my relationship with my Lord. But I end up causing too much grief when I get into these discussions and I am trying to change that.

BTW, Alex thank you for your observations about the NT Believer and the Mosaic Law. You are correct that sometimes we tend to over think things that God has made simple.

Anthony H

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131493#Comment_131493

From our personal experience, tithing is easy, giving everything to God is harder, and letting him control our time is the hardest thing of all.

Amen ! [:)]

Alan Macgregor

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131493#Comment_131493

From our personal experience, tithing is easy, giving everything to God is harder, and letting him control our time is the hardest thing of all.

Absolutely, Terry.

Gal 5:1

Anthony Etienne

Can anyone recommend a Logos resource that discusses the relationship between Mosaic Law and the NT believer?

Many times I see people pulling out support for their position using a portion of the Pentatuch (e.g. Tithing, Incest, Lending etc.), yet they reject other laws as being cultural. I am looking for a cogent set of arguments concerning different interpretation models.

BTW, if there is a good resource that you are aware of, but it isn't in Logos, I would appreciate knowing about that as well, we can always turn it into a suggestion.

Terry, I don't know if this has aready been brought up, but according to Gen 14:18-20 and Heb 7:6 the paying of tithes pre-dates Mosaic Law. I'm not sure if this is the type of info you are looking for, but it is a datapoint worth considering.

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131357#Comment_131357

Terry, your eyes will get even more glazed and your cranial pressure increase if you start reading in all these resources without starting with a simple Bible study of your own, asking the Spirit of wisdom and understanding to teach you.

A simple tool to assist such an inductive study would be the two resources included with Logos packages: Old Testament Quotations and Allusions in the New Testament and Old Testament Quotes in the New Testament. It is instructive to go through this list of passages asking the question: how did Jesus and the apostles apply the OT to Christians?

If you dive directly into the other books without enough of a good sense of the answer to this question, you are bound to get lost in a maze of theological presuppositions.

Blessings,

Francis

Terry Poperszky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131527#Comment_131527

Terry, I don't know if this has aready been brought up, but according to Gen 14:18-20 and Heb 7:6 the paying of tithes pre-dates Mosaic Law. I'm not sure if this is the type of info you are looking for, but it is a datapoint worth considering.

Anthony, tithing was just one example that I listed in my original question, and someone singled out. I really was looking for input from others as to resources that would reference different methods of interpretation concerning the NT believer and the Mosaic law. I agree that the scripture that you reference should be incorporated into any study concerning the practice of tithing.

Terry, your eyes will get even more glazed and your cranial pressure increase if you start reading in all these resources without starting with a simple Bible study of your own, asking the Spirit of wisdom and understanding to teach you.

Francis, it wouldn't be the first time. Actually the reason behind my question was two fold.

1. I feel that there is a general misunderstanding on how to deal with OT law which results in inconsistent interpretation of God's Word in many cases (IMHO). As I take a new SS class into the study of an OT book, I believe that I at least need to touch on the subject before we start the actual study.

2. While I have a system of interpretation that I believe works, this is a prime time to re-examine my own beliefs to make sure that it is truly is scriptural, and to examine systems of interpretation that are different from mine so I can better understand the reason behind them. This forum has become and excellent resource for this type of information.

It is instructive to go through this list of passages asking the question: how did Jesus and the apostles apply the OT to Christians?

I find this very good advise.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131417#Comment_131417

Can anyone recommend a Logos resource that
discusses the relationship between Mosaic Law and the NT
believer?

Oops - I just noticed that this could easily be misinterpreted. It was not a response to Terry - it was a response to the poster immediately above the post i.e.:

I'm sure this will bring out the self-appointed
cyber police, but the question was raised about the relationship
between the Mosaic Law and the NT believer, and I think it deserves an
answer even if it doesn't come directly from a Logos book.

Robert Pavich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131544#Comment_131544

3 Things I'd like to say:

1.) Dan D and Alex S: Good thoughts...much appreciated!

2.) Thanks for the link to the resources and the excerpts.

3.) The thing I LOVE about L4 is that I can read about a resource and be "reading it" from my own library in under 5 minutes!

Yes, I bought the "Continuity and discontinuity:" resource just a minute ago because of this discussion!

Terry Poperszky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131544#Comment_131544

Oops - I just noticed that this could easily be misinterpreted. It was not a response to Terry

I knew that, but it took me a minute. [;)]

Ralph Mauch

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131568#Comment_131568

Yes, I bought the "Continuity and discontinuity:" resource just a minute ago because of this discussion!

You guys are killing me[:'(] , I did the same, but not just because of the discussion here, I actually thought I had it already, but it wasn't in my Library but is now. So I guess some of these questionable topics prove to be profitable for Logos.[;)]

blessings,

Praiser

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131611#Comment_131611

If you have the Portfolio Base Package, you already have Continuity and Discontinuity. It is the only Base Package it is included in.

Here is link to the book if anyone is interested. http://www.logos.com/products/details/2914 Price is $25.

Friedrich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131568#Comment_131568

Yes, I bought the "Continuity and discontinuity:" resource just a minute ago because of this discussion!

I'd bought the hard copy version just before it came out in Logos, and I immediately bought the Logos version . . . I haven't read a lot in it yet, but it is one of my "got to get to its". Thankfully I am not Rosie, because I think that list would be longer than years I have left to live . . . [;)] I have put it in a reading group with Beckwith's "The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church" (more historical investigation of canon, but it gets into theology, too).

http://www.logos.com/products/details/3187

William

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131611#Comment_131611

So I guess some of these questionable topics prove to be profitable for Logos.

Absolutely!!!!! I have personally spent at least 300 dollars on books from discussions here. In fact, I think I have lost track of a few "need to get to" books. I think it is my topic of study changes so much. At least I have written down the topics I move to study before I get to studying them. They seem to be important now so they will be important later.

Blair Laird

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131361#Comment_131361

As for the mosiac covenant it is really broken up into three sections

In Exodus 19:5-6 God, through Moses, lays the covenant before the people and tells them what He will do for them "if" they obey His voice. The people of one accord reply "All that the Lord has spoken we will do" (Ex. 19:8) and the covenant is sealed. In the next chapter God gives them the "Ten Commandments," and in much of the rest of Exodus, nearly all of Leviticus, and a good portion of Numbers and Deuteronomy, He reveals more requirements. This covenant can be broken into three parts:

1. The Moral Law (Ex. 20: 1-26, the Ten Commandments, etc.).

2. The Civil (or Judicial) Law (Ex. 21:1-24:18). This was the precepts of the judicial system for the punishment of crimes and settlement of disputes.

3. The Ceremonial Law (Ex. 25:1-40:38, etc.). This was in essence their religious system and included all the details of sacrifice and worship (the tabernacle, priesthood, offerings, etc.).

This covenant also has a sign: the sabbath day—the seventh day of the week (Saturday [Ex. 31:13-17]).

Here, we must remind the reader that this covenant was only between God and the Israelites. No part of it applied to any Gentile then and neither does it now. The moral law of God found in the Ten Commandments is a reflection of God's nature and is profitable for anyone in any dispensation, but doctrinally as given in Exodus and Deuteronomy they are binding only on the Jews. All of the commandments, excluding the fifth (the sabbath), can be found in some form in the New Testament, thus making their message apply also to born again Christians, but as they are found in the Mosaic Covenant, they apply ONLY to Israel.

The Difference is in the Dispensations
How to make sense of the differences in the Bible
By Timothy S. Morton
Copyright 1997, Timothy S. Morton

http://www.biblebelievers.com/Dispen1b.htm

Hope this helps... Terry

Terry Poperszky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131680#Comment_131680

Hope this helps... Terry

Yes it does Blair, it is a nice synopsis. I am really enjoying this topic and I appreciate all the participation.

Blair Laird

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131842#Comment_131842

Hope this helps... Terry

Yes it does Blair, it is a nice synopsis. I am really enjoying this topic and I appreciate all the participation.

I have been going through this sorta stuff myself for the past couple weeks. The author that wrote the article has some presuppositions that I dont agree with. But for the most part he seems pretty solid. Learning the difference in dispensations and covenants really helps people connect the dots.

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131844#Comment_131844

Hey Blair,

I know this is going off-track and my desire is not to open up a debate. But since it seems that you have reflected on the matter, does it seem to you that dispensationalism is an exaggeratedly detailed attempt to draw up a schedule of biblical events/fulfillments based on the various covenants?

Or do you see a value in dispensationalism that a good grip on covenants does not dispense of?

Blair Laird

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131988#Comment_131988

Hey Blair,

I know this is going off-track and my desire is not to open up a debate. But since it seems that you have reflected on the matter, does it seem to you that dispensationalism is an exaggeratedly detailed attempt to draw up a schedule of biblical events/fulfillments based on the various covenants?

Or do you see a value in dispensationalism that a good grip on covenants does not dispense of?

I believe it has a good grip on connecting dots in the bible and looking at the bible as a whole. I believe the most critical point that one needs to get is that you cannot always apply what God requires from man in one dispensation / covenant and apply it to another. As an example in the Edenic covenant God required man to eat only veggies. Does he require that of us today ? No that was superseded by the dispensation of conscience and the Adamic covenant. Do we have to keep the law ? No that was superseded also. When a person takes certain things from one dispensation / covenant and applies it to others it sometimes ends in heresy. Does a person have to do no work on Saturday and worship on Saturday only? Same thing.. Dispensationalism helps keep people out of error. That is one of the biggest benefits that I see in it. Is dispensationalism the only way to break down the bible ? No, there are other ways also that are very valid. I think it has alot of things going for it. But instead of getting to far off here if you want to discuss it more your welcome to post your questions in my debate forum. I love discussing subjects of the bible but this forum is not really the place to do it.

forum.divinesoteriology.com

Blessings in Christ.

Jeremy

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131568#Comment_131568

3.) The thing I LOVE about L4 is that I can read about a resource and be "reading it" from my own library in under 5 minutes!

Yes, I bought the "Continuity and discontinuity:" resource just a minute ago because of this discussion!

And the online store is always open. I have bought books at 2:30 AM before.

BillS

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/131176#Comment_131176

Bill, Moral vs. Ceremonial is a categorization that I hadn't considered, and I am not sure I understand myself since some of the legal requirements seem to fit both categories (IMHO). Let me expand on the reason for the question. I am getting ready to teach Malachi, in which is a section of scripture that is often used to obligate NT believers to follow an OT legal requirement (i.e. Tithing). Yet, in that same section, God says that not bringing in the offerings that are required in the Mosiac Law are tantamount to robbing him as well, but I have yet to hear someone saying that offerings (e.g. First fruits, wave, drink etc.) are still required of NT believers.

Hi Terry,

I wanted to pray awhile before I answered... Have been reflecting on & off, & brought it up in a Bible study, yesterday. I received my answer in a devotional this morning... Romans 6:15-23. Yes, we're free from slavery to sin under the law. We're free in order to be slaves to righteousness. That's what I think Jesus is teaching in the Beatitudes. Slavery to righteousness goes far BEYOND the law...

Along that line, I hear Jesus' teaching about the widow's offering a little differently--and related. With respect to tithing, if we're no longer under the law, then we're judged by what we keep--not whether we reach the Law's prescribed ceiling of 10% (or higher, depending on how we read the Law's various commands to give).

As always, I offer this tentatively & descriptive (what I hear) and NOT confidently & prescriptive (message from God to this forum).

Blessings!

Terry Poperszky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/134246#Comment_134246

I wanted to pray awhile before I answered... Have been reflecting on & off, & brought it up in a Bible study, yesterday. I received my answer in a devotional this morning

Bill thanks for your insight and devotion to his Word. Even as I have started posting less recently, I still rely heavily on this forum as a place where I can broaden my world view of Christianity by hearing from both those that hold the same opinion/belief set as mine, but are able to communicate it more aptly, and by hearing from those who find my opinions/beliefs to fall short of scriptural accuracy. Either way, I learn and grow.

Personally, I agree with your line of reasoning, but beyond that this thread has given me a set of resources to better be able to portray the spectrum of beliefs about this subject to my class.

As far as the subject of tithing goes, when we reach that portion of Malachi, I will declare "Tithing" to be a religious buzz word and the class will then be tasked with researching exactly what Malachi meant when he used it (My wife and I have already decided to mask our own convictions (as much as possible)), and then let them draw their own conclusions.

But IMHO this is more than the issue of tithing, how we deal with the vast amount of information that God has granted us in the OT centers around this issue and I am glad for those that have contributed to this discussion.