Recently, I attended a training seminar for my job. This seminar was all about "sales excellence" - the art of being a professional salesman. One of the core steps in the process of making a sale was asking questions. Who, what, when, why, where, and tell me. The more information we could find out, we were told, the more complete solution we could build for our customer.
Questions are deeply important to me in my job. I ask and am asked questions by people all day: "why does my computer do this?" - "Why is it booting to a blue screen" - "why won't it turn on?" etc. How effective would I be at my job if, every time I was asked such a question, my only answer was "well, better get a new one!" - That would be irresponsible and would defeat the purpose of being a computer tech. Indeed "get a new one" may be the correct answer at times, but not all the time.
Questions are an integral part of the human experience - formulating questions begin the moment we are born. The first question I can remember is asking my father why we go to church. Quite a good question for a four year old, I think. Questions are what allow us to grow. It's what advances science (real science, anyways), propels technology forward and brings us to an understanding of extremely obscure references.
Questions are also important in my study of the biblical text and my preparation for ministry - I wouldn't be a very good student of the Bible if I didn't ask "why" or "What does that mean" every once in awhile (quite often, actually!) I also have questions put to me - both honestly and sarcastically, and sometimes I can't tell which. The spark for this article comes from a tweeter who writes...
Sarcastic, yes. Might she honestly want an answer? possibly. She certainly gave me that impression in later tweets. A statement like this demonstrates real ignorance. (that's not an insult, just a statement of fact.) This is an argument that has been used time and time and every time, it seems, the user thinks that Christians have never heard this before. It really doesn't take a lot of time to figure it out - Get yourself a good study bible, listen to a good sermon - The answer becomes clear very fast.Deuteronomy 22:9-11 is a repeat of Leviticus 19:19. The section is part of what is known as the Holiness code - God's instruction for living in a land that is surrounded by paganism. Already we have a very basic answer for why God told Israel not to sow two different seed together, plow with two different animals, breed two different kinds of cattle, or wear garments made with blended fabrics - It had to do with being separate from the pagan culture. Lets take a closer look. All three laws can be boiled down to this: Do not mix A with B. Why? Because the pagan nations around you like to mix A with B. But why? Why do the pagans do this?
An answer to such questions does not have to be either/or. Usually, God has multiple reasons to ban a practice. In the case of mixing seeds the answer is two fold. Mixing seeds produces inferior crops that create desease in the soil and in the animals and people who eat it. The prohibition was also against the pagan practices of the day in which mixing two seeds along with magical rites and incantations was thought to provoke the fertility gods and thus produce a bountiful harvest. This is also true of mixing fabrics - Not only was the law to keep Israel from such silly superstitions but “wool, when combined with linen, increases its power of passing off the electricity from the body. In hot climates, it brings on malignant fevers and exhausts the strength; and when passing off from the body, it meets with the heated air, inflames and excoriates like a blister”(1)
To the second question that the tweeter implies: why are Christians no longer commanded to follow the holiness code? The short answer is that it no longer applies to us but we do take away principles from it. The Bible, like any document (old or new) must be read in context. To do any less would be dishonest. Non-Christians enjoy cherry picking texts, like the holiness code, and using them to make an argument that the Historic Christian Faith (which believes that the Bible is God's word, cover to cover) is inconsistent and Christians like to pick and choose what they do and do not believe. I understand the need for consistency and I do not deny that inconsistency has happened. When there is inconsistency between faith and practice it usually means one of three things: The person is either very young and immature in their faith and is continuing to grow and root out sin in their life, the Christian is ignorant of the inconsistency and will strive to change once informed or that person is a false convert. Usually, such a person is marked by gross sins and disregards passages that clearly condemn the continuation in sin.
The Christian not following OT laws like these is not an inconsistency. There is a very good reason that Christians are not bound to follow Jewish law. There are several reasons, actually.
1. The Holiness code found in Leviticus and Deuteronomy was for ethnic Israel at that time. The three rules of Biblical interpretation are context, CONTEXT, CONTEXT. Reading the Bible in context is what it means to read the Bible literally. For example: you don't interpret something literally if its obviously figurative. Jesus said that He is "the door" - that doesn't mean He's a wooden plank on hinges. What it means is that one must go to Him to enter the Kingdom. Context is very important. Failing to read something in context (Bible or otherwise) is intellectually dishonest and disrespects the original author and his audience and everyone reading my words knows that because you all write letters and emails and read books, and follow written instructions and some of you write paper and books. You wouldn't want clear words like "I love you" to be twisted into "I hate you" - would you? Words have meaning in context. Saying the words I love you to my wife mean one thing, while those same words to a friend mean another. Context matters!
Keep in mind that Israel has just come out of Egypt - a pagan land. They have been there for a long time (400 years) and have been infected with the pagan practices of the Egyptians. They are sojourning to a land that is full of and surrounded by pagan peoples and the code was meant to keep them separate from the pagans.
Let me put it this way: I am a Vikings fan (yes, I know. They stink.) - If I covered my office in Green Bay Packers gear, what impression would you get? You would think I was a Pack fan and my choice of decors would be inconsistent with my stated choice of football team. The same is true here. The funny thing about idolatrous practice is that if you give it an inch it takes a mile. God continually warned against giving any ground to idolatrous practices. Any compromise would lead to full blown apostasy in a few generations. We can certainly testify to this in our own day - idea's spread fast, especially when those who seem to guide culture (Hollywood, etc.) endorse ideas. Homosexuality, for example, has gown from a detested practice to almost complete acceptance in under 70 years. Divorce was once looked down upon and some would commit suicide before getting a divorce, yet now its common place. Ideas spread fast and God's aim was to nip them in the bud before they could corrupt the people.
2. The reasons behind the holiness code are foreign to the Church and to our culture. But there still are guiding principles.
Is my shirt a blended fabric? Currently no, it isn't. But I do own cloths that are made of two different fabrics. (my uniform for my security job for example). Is there a prevailing superstition in culture that doing so has some magical property or that it will give me some super ability to produce many healthy children? No, there isn't. (It's still a poor choice of clothing on a hot day.) If I wear blended fabrics would I be identified as something other than Christian? No. I think you get the point. But there is a guiding principle: God says "don't be like the pagan people around you." - Now what practices or clothing would go against my confession? Off the top of my head...
Promiscuity, infidelity, obscene language, drunkenness, drug use, wearing clothing with crude messages, dressing immodestly, being disrespectful to those in authority over me, being disrespectful to my peers or coworkers, going to a club and dancing in a suggestive manner(2), being crude in general - get the picture?
3. I am free from the OT Law because I belong to Christ Jesus.
When I say I am free from the law and now under grace I do not mean that I live willy-nilly without any regards to sin. I still strive to follow the law (and by law I mean the 10 commandments and principles found in OT Law). When I say I strive to follow the law I do not mean that I do so legalistically either. My obedience record has no bearing on my standing before God because Christ has attributed his perfect record to me (and all His people). I strive to live in a manner that best glorifies God because I love Him and I am grateful for what He did for me.
This brings up another question: There still are things from the Old Testament that do carry over to today. Why some and not others? Why does the laws on homosexuality and bestiality still apply but laws about blended fabric don't? The answer is simple and two fold: First, laws about sexuality are repeated in the New Testament. Practices about blending fabric are not. Secondly, Laws about blended fabric made sense in their context and still contain a guiding principle (don't be like the pagans around you.) The New Testament also has commands based on culture(3) that still have the same guiding principle: be separate from the pagans. Laws about sexuality continue because those things remain the same in all times, places, and cultures. The beginning line "when a man falls in love with a woman and gets married..." is the same no matter where or when you are from. Men and women go together. Whether it be naturally or in a lab, a mans sperm must ask a woman egg for a dance in order to produce a child. That's simple biology. Male and Male do not produce offspring. Female and Female do not produce offspring. You need one of each. We even use the terms male and female in technical terms. - "Plug the male end on the speaker into the female end on the receiver"(4).
No matter how hard we try, we can't get away from what is clearly displayed in the created order.(5) Issues of sexuality have always existed. Old Testament Israel dealt with it, the New Testament Church dealt with it and we deal with it today. People, both single and married, still sleep around. People both male and female choose to follow their passions for the same sex instead of waring against them. Nothings changed. That is why those prohibitions still apply.
Finally, I must address why the punishments attached to those laws no longer apply. Why don't we put homosexuals to death? Or disobedient children for that matter? That answer is also simple: The civil punishments for those things were under a theocracy (where the religion also runs the state). We don't live in a theocracy. Medieval Europe was a theocracy. Islamic countries are theocracies. Western countries are not theocracies. There is, however, an underlying truth: God takes sin seriously. People who do not repent of their sins and trust in Christ for salvation will fall under the wrath of God and die in their sins. From the simple lie to homosexuality. From theft to murder - God will deal out punishment for sin. The sin of disobeying ones parents will be dealt with in the end one way or another; all sins will be paid for one way or another; either by that person or by Jesus.
What is the overriding principle for instances of obscurity? Ask questions and follow through to find the answers. To simply throw out "blended fabric" as if its an argument that will destroy Christianity is intellectually dishonest. It's a straw-man argument. Beating a straw-man to death may be fun but that's all it is. Its not an intelligent argument and it does nothing more than further ignorant thinking and make the user look foolish. In short, its (a)musing.
1.Jamieson, Robert ; Fausset, A. R. ; Fausset, A. R. ; Brown, David ; Brown, David: A Commentary, Critical and Explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments. Oak Harbor, WA : Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997, S. Le 19:19
2. I'm not against dancing, per say. Just that of the bump and grind verity.
3. Paul tells young women not to braid their hair or wear costly jewelry in 1st Tim 2:9. It is not that braiding ones hair or wearing jewelry is bad. Paul tells the women of that time to avoid doing this because the temple prostitutes of the time dressed this way. So to update that to 21st century culture Paul was saying "don't dress like the prostitutes."
4. I wonder when even that will become politically incorrect.
5. I find it funny that, even with an evolutionary world view (one that I do not hold), homosexuality would be considered as inferior to heterosexuality. That's consistent with the idea of natural selection - those that survive and pass on their genes will continue. How could homosexuality be natural if it cannot be passed on? Shouldn't it eventually die out?
0 comments:
Post a Comment