It’s
a common scenario. Someone objects to the Bible’s teaching on a point
of ethics or morality (often homosexuality, promiscuity, or divorce), so
he cites a couple of Old Testament commandments and says something
like, “Well, the Bible also says not to wear a garment made of wool and
linen mixed together (Deuteronomy 22:11) and not to eat pork products or
shrimp
(Leviticus 11:7-12).” The implication is either that the person
upholding biblical standards of sexuality is a hypocrite because he’s
wearing a linen/wool blend sport coat and ate a hotdog for lunch, or
that the Bible’s commandments are inconsistent and therefore not
credible. And it’s not just a hypothetical scenario. A recent New York Times op-ed article
argued against a biblical position on homosexuality by suggesting that
the Bible shouldn’t be taken literally because it also says to “refrain
from planting multiple kinds of seed in one field” and not to charge
“interest to the poor.”
Such arguments seem convincing at first. But their problem is a
failure to recognize the Bible’s overarching storyline. They assume that
Scripture is largely a list of doctrines and rules. Since some of the
rules seem outdated or impractical, the critics reason, all of them
should be taken with a grain of salt. The problem with such reasoning is
that the Bible isn’t merely a list of rules and doctrines. It’s a story
about how God relates to the world He created. And with a little study
it becomes obvious that God gives slightly different instructions to His
people in different parts of the story.
In the Old Testament the Jews were God’s chosen people. He gave
certain ritual and judicial laws to set them apart from the pagan,
Gentile nations around them. The commands mentioned in the Times op-ed
are perfect examples. Leviticus 19:19 told the Israelites not to sow a
field with two different kinds of seed. The idea was to set Israelite
fields apart from Gentile fields, marking the Jews as God’s set-apart
people. Similarly, Deuteronomy 23:19-20 forbade Jews from charging
interest on loans to their countrymen, particularly the poor, though
they were free to charge interest on loans to foreigners. Again, the
command was intended to set Israelites apart from all other nations as
God’s chosen people—with whom He had made a covenant and on whom He had
set His love. Similar explanations apply to the commandments not to mix
wool and linen and to refrain from eating certain types of meat.
After the coming of Christ, however, there was no longer a spiritual
divide between Jews and Gentiles. All who placed their faith in Jesus
could become God’s people, regardless of their nationality (Ephesians
2:11-22). Accordingly, God abolished the ritual and judicial laws that
set Jews apart from non-Jews (Acts 10:9-48; Hebrews 8:13-9:28)—laws like
those about sowing seed and charging interest. At the same time, God
kept in force moral standards that promote holiness and general
well-being, as in the Sermon on the Mount and Paul’s teaching on
marriage and sexuality. That’s why Christians are neither hypocritical
nor inconsistent when, for example, they insist on keeping sex within
monogamous, heterosexual marriage but do not keep Old Testament
ceremonial laws.
When believers understand this storyline, they gain a powerful weapon
in the battle to uphold biblical morality. Most importantly, of course,
knowing the overarching story of Scripture helps us to know Christ and
see a hint of the gospel in every passage. That alone is reason enough
to study the narrative of Scripture. But in addition, knowledge of
biblical theology makes us less vulnerable in those all-too-common
circumstances when a critic begins, “Well, the Bible also says . . .”
No comments:
Post a Comment