"...the law had a temporary purpose, and when that purpose is accomplished those bits of the law can be wisely set aside, not as archaic or ill-informed restrictive practices that we’ve now outgrown, but as necessary earlier elements in a plan which has now reached a new stage at which those elements, no longer required, are rightly to be shelved. The amphibious craft switches off the propeller when it comes on shore, not because the propeller was a bad thing we shouldn’t have used in the first place but because it was a good thing which has completed its water-related job."
NT Wright
Showing posts with label Law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Law. Show all posts
7.12.2010
2.15.2010
Training Wheels Pt IX
So what?
How does this become practical?
Hopefully in two ways:
1) A closer, and more contextual, reading of the Law. A more nuanced approach to what is going on in the Old Testament passages, and the New Testament itself specifically in reference to the Law. Consequently, a greater understanding of what God has been up to throughout history, so that we might gain greater understanding of what God is up to now!
2) A deeper desire to become righteous in Christ! A growing passion to engage the Spirit of God, and the source of righteousness! A heightened resolve to open our souls to our Father through prayer, fasting, study, worship, giving, serving, and sharing.
2.13.2010
Training Wheels Pt VIII
So lets take a look at a few specifics...
Jesus Himself set aside, as we have seen, the food laws laid down in the Law. He additionally set aside much of the Law pertaining to ceremonial cleanliness; He routinely came into contact with those who were considered unclean, and proclaimed that His cleanness made them clean, not the other way around.
He did, however, affirm much of the Law in its dealings with human ethical behavior surrounding economic, sexual, and interpersonal behavior. In fact Jesus took these portions of the Law and made them much more deeply binding on His followers, precisely because the issue is not obedience to the Law, but learning to become the kind of people who would fulfill the Law without trying to; who would not murder, cheat, or steal, regardless of the existence of the Law.
So what do we do with new claims to do with the Law what Jesus did?
Do we allow Jesus' innovation because He is Jesus? Do we ban others' innovation because they are not Jesus? Or are we each and every one of us expected to do what Jesus did with respect to the Law?
===================================
A perfect example is the sexual ethic. In recent decades we have heard very unique voices within the Church. Throughout the history of Christian thought the sexual ethic has been quite homogenous: sexual pleasure is, and should remain, a culmination and a reflection of the vow to lifelong partnership between a husband and a wife. Throughout history there have been dissenting voices from outside the Church, however, we now see a growing minority within the church advocating that we set aside this clear consensus of Christian teaching on sexuality, and that we do so for precisely the reasons (according to these voices) that Jesus encouraged us to set aside certain portions of the law in His day.
I disagree with these voices, and here is why.
1) The traditional sexual ethic is consistent with agape love, the love that has grown up under the tutelage of the Law, and then come out into its own maturity. The inconsistency claimed by these advocates (if we love people we will allow them to express their love, and so we must change the sexual ethic) is based on a notion of love that is rooted in popular culture and has grown up under the tutelage of that culture, in many ways in opposition to the wisdom offered by the Law.
2) While it is my contention that God desires for us to come to a place of maturity wherein we are able to judge for ourselves where 'Love fulfills the Law' prudence demands that we recognize the primacy of Jesus' judgment! His words should carry more weight than our own. What seems wise to our minds must be set aside whenever it contradicts His wisdom.
===================================
We Christians have disparaged the Law, in some ways this is consistent with New Testament teachings, but in other ways we have gone too far. The Law is not evil, nor is keeping it evil; quite the opposite, the Law is good, and keeping it is what God desires. The evil is in us. It is in how we approach the Law, how we use it, or more precisely how we misuse and abuse it. The Law was never intended as a means for making men righteous, but rather as boundary markers pointing towards righteousness. The Law is God's tool, and we must use it consistent with His purposes for it. As the Messiah's people it still has a function for us, albeit muted since the coming of the Messiah. It serves for us, the purpose of providing the backdrop to Jesus' teachings. Like students who occasionally read through their old Algebra text to be clear about what it is that their Calculus professor is teaching, or read through their old American History texts to gain understanding into contemporary affairs.
Jesus Himself set aside, as we have seen, the food laws laid down in the Law. He additionally set aside much of the Law pertaining to ceremonial cleanliness; He routinely came into contact with those who were considered unclean, and proclaimed that His cleanness made them clean, not the other way around.
He did, however, affirm much of the Law in its dealings with human ethical behavior surrounding economic, sexual, and interpersonal behavior. In fact Jesus took these portions of the Law and made them much more deeply binding on His followers, precisely because the issue is not obedience to the Law, but learning to become the kind of people who would fulfill the Law without trying to; who would not murder, cheat, or steal, regardless of the existence of the Law.
So what do we do with new claims to do with the Law what Jesus did?
Do we allow Jesus' innovation because He is Jesus? Do we ban others' innovation because they are not Jesus? Or are we each and every one of us expected to do what Jesus did with respect to the Law?
===================================
A perfect example is the sexual ethic. In recent decades we have heard very unique voices within the Church. Throughout the history of Christian thought the sexual ethic has been quite homogenous: sexual pleasure is, and should remain, a culmination and a reflection of the vow to lifelong partnership between a husband and a wife. Throughout history there have been dissenting voices from outside the Church, however, we now see a growing minority within the church advocating that we set aside this clear consensus of Christian teaching on sexuality, and that we do so for precisely the reasons (according to these voices) that Jesus encouraged us to set aside certain portions of the law in His day.
I disagree with these voices, and here is why.
1) The traditional sexual ethic is consistent with agape love, the love that has grown up under the tutelage of the Law, and then come out into its own maturity. The inconsistency claimed by these advocates (if we love people we will allow them to express their love, and so we must change the sexual ethic) is based on a notion of love that is rooted in popular culture and has grown up under the tutelage of that culture, in many ways in opposition to the wisdom offered by the Law.
2) While it is my contention that God desires for us to come to a place of maturity wherein we are able to judge for ourselves where 'Love fulfills the Law' prudence demands that we recognize the primacy of Jesus' judgment! His words should carry more weight than our own. What seems wise to our minds must be set aside whenever it contradicts His wisdom.
===================================
We Christians have disparaged the Law, in some ways this is consistent with New Testament teachings, but in other ways we have gone too far. The Law is not evil, nor is keeping it evil; quite the opposite, the Law is good, and keeping it is what God desires. The evil is in us. It is in how we approach the Law, how we use it, or more precisely how we misuse and abuse it. The Law was never intended as a means for making men righteous, but rather as boundary markers pointing towards righteousness. The Law is God's tool, and we must use it consistent with His purposes for it. As the Messiah's people it still has a function for us, albeit muted since the coming of the Messiah. It serves for us, the purpose of providing the backdrop to Jesus' teachings. Like students who occasionally read through their old Algebra text to be clear about what it is that their Calculus professor is teaching, or read through their old American History texts to gain understanding into contemporary affairs.
2.11.2010
Training Wheels Pt VII
Follow the link to a wonderfully illuminating essay on Scripture by Bishop Wright
2.10.2010
Training Wheels Pt V
If all of this is true, if Jesus then, is able to set aside portions of the Law, with the claim that 'love fulfills the Law, and love commands this or that action,' then we are faced with a rather important question, and a rather serious practical problem...
How do we know what is or isn't moral? Is the Law to be completely set aside? Or even if it is not, what do we do with other people's claims that we should set aside different portions of the Law, because 'love has led us to do so?'
=====================
We read earlier the scriptural truth that 'love is the fulfillment of the Law,' let us think upon this...
We know what the Law is:
it is the commands God gave us to govern action; telling us to do certain things, or to avoid certain things, also telling us to value certain things, even to think and feel certain things. The Law also provides for the eventual breaking of the Law; punishments and sacrifices, what should happen when this or that aspect of the Law has been broken, how does the individual or community get back on the path after leaving it...
...but what is love?
Here we come to an interesting realization; love in our culture is not defined in terms that would line up with the Law. It would be a hard sell to say 'Love fulfills the Law' if we defined love in accordance with our culture! Our culture defines love primarily in terms of desire. We love people when we desire to be around them and with them. We love people when we free them to pursue their desires unhindered. This kind of love (and it is a form of love) would be hard pressed to encourage obedience to the Law in any way shape or form...
=====================
Our love itself, then, is in need of shaping. It is not a pure thing, not a holy thing, and needs the Law itself to direct that passion, to form it into the kind of Love that will indeed fulfill the Law. This sort of love is less about desire, and more about a concerted effort of the will to effect good on behalf of another. This is what is meant by the word agape.
When Scripture talks of a 'love that fulfills the law,' then, it is speaking of a love that was tutored by that law, and grew up under it, and so whenever that love 'revises' that law, it does so in the spirit of the very law it is revising; a love that is defined by our concept of God (namely Jesus), not a God that is defined by our concept of love (namely desire)!
How do we know what is or isn't moral? Is the Law to be completely set aside? Or even if it is not, what do we do with other people's claims that we should set aside different portions of the Law, because 'love has led us to do so?'
=====================
We read earlier the scriptural truth that 'love is the fulfillment of the Law,' let us think upon this...
We know what the Law is:
it is the commands God gave us to govern action; telling us to do certain things, or to avoid certain things, also telling us to value certain things, even to think and feel certain things. The Law also provides for the eventual breaking of the Law; punishments and sacrifices, what should happen when this or that aspect of the Law has been broken, how does the individual or community get back on the path after leaving it...
...but what is love?
Here we come to an interesting realization; love in our culture is not defined in terms that would line up with the Law. It would be a hard sell to say 'Love fulfills the Law' if we defined love in accordance with our culture! Our culture defines love primarily in terms of desire. We love people when we desire to be around them and with them. We love people when we free them to pursue their desires unhindered. This kind of love (and it is a form of love) would be hard pressed to encourage obedience to the Law in any way shape or form...
=====================
Our love itself, then, is in need of shaping. It is not a pure thing, not a holy thing, and needs the Law itself to direct that passion, to form it into the kind of Love that will indeed fulfill the Law. This sort of love is less about desire, and more about a concerted effort of the will to effect good on behalf of another. This is what is meant by the word agape.
When Scripture talks of a 'love that fulfills the law,' then, it is speaking of a love that was tutored by that law, and grew up under it, and so whenever that love 'revises' that law, it does so in the spirit of the very law it is revising; a love that is defined by our concept of God (namely Jesus), not a God that is defined by our concept of love (namely desire)!
2.09.2010
Training Wheels Pt IV
We read the words of the Law inLeviticus 11 that expressly prohibit the eating of certain foods, they are declared unclean. Yet Jesus tells a crowd of observant Jews to ignore this command!
Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.'
Matthew 15:10-11
How then are we to account for Jesus words about the Law in the Sermon on the Mount?
Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.
Matthew 5:17-20
============================
Jesus is 'fulfilling the Law' yet also seemingly breaking the Law and even encouraging others to set aside what it says, at least one specific portion of it...
============================
If you have ever been around someone who has mastered some skill, albeit a sport, painting, a musical instrument, woodworking, or cooking, you will see the same thing. I am not talking about someone who is good, or even great among their peers, but rather, a practitioner that stands as a giant above the generations before and since.
Think Albert Einstein, Claude Monet, Florence Nightingale, or Thelonious Monk, I am personally familiar with wrestlers John Smith (2x Olympic Gold Medalist) and Stephen Abas (3x NCAA Champion). These were people that in some sense 'broke the rules' of their craft, setting aside the decades, or even centuries, of wisdom from previous practitioners, and yet, in doing so they were not setting aside the craft itself, but rather somehow extending it, making it better, and more true to itself. We could easily add to the list of names...
What these individuals possessed was a mastery of craft that actually exceeds the craft itself! They were each able (in the case of science, painting, medicine, music, and wrestling) to take the craft and learn it, understand the rules, the guidelines, the practices, the craft itself, to such a degree that they were able to move beyond the rules, guidelines and practices, yet remain true to the craft itself!
This is precisely what Jesus is with respect to the Law.
He is a Master of the Law, a Master of Righteousness, a Master of Love. The course of righteousness to which the Law is a guide is the constant path of Jesus' feet, and even without the Law to guide them, those feet would stay the course...
Jesus is the 'fulfillment' of the Law.
Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen and understand. What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.'
Matthew 15:10-11
How then are we to account for Jesus words about the Law in the Sermon on the Mount?
Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.
Matthew 5:17-20
============================
Jesus is 'fulfilling the Law' yet also seemingly breaking the Law and even encouraging others to set aside what it says, at least one specific portion of it...
============================
If you have ever been around someone who has mastered some skill, albeit a sport, painting, a musical instrument, woodworking, or cooking, you will see the same thing. I am not talking about someone who is good, or even great among their peers, but rather, a practitioner that stands as a giant above the generations before and since.
Think Albert Einstein, Claude Monet, Florence Nightingale, or Thelonious Monk, I am personally familiar with wrestlers John Smith (2x Olympic Gold Medalist) and Stephen Abas (3x NCAA Champion). These were people that in some sense 'broke the rules' of their craft, setting aside the decades, or even centuries, of wisdom from previous practitioners, and yet, in doing so they were not setting aside the craft itself, but rather somehow extending it, making it better, and more true to itself. We could easily add to the list of names...
What these individuals possessed was a mastery of craft that actually exceeds the craft itself! They were each able (in the case of science, painting, medicine, music, and wrestling) to take the craft and learn it, understand the rules, the guidelines, the practices, the craft itself, to such a degree that they were able to move beyond the rules, guidelines and practices, yet remain true to the craft itself!
This is precisely what Jesus is with respect to the Law.
He is a Master of the Law, a Master of Righteousness, a Master of Love. The course of righteousness to which the Law is a guide is the constant path of Jesus' feet, and even without the Law to guide them, those feet would stay the course...
Jesus is the 'fulfillment' of the Law.
2.07.2010
Training Wheels Pt III
So the Law was given to point towards righteousness, and in fact is the path of righteousness, but does not itself give us the power to be righteous nor enable us to walk the path. Rather, righteousness (or more specifically agape love) fulfills the requirements of the Law. Righteousness is the ability to walk the path.
It is with this understanding that we begin to talk about improvisation upon the Law.
The training wheels that keep a small child from falling over are taken off of the bike as soon as possible, but why not keep them on? Professional speed-cyclists can get their bikes outside of the range that would be allowed for by training wheels. On slanted tracks these cyclists can get going fast enough to get their bicycles nearly horizontal; BMX riders do tricks with their bikes that would not be possible if the training wheels were still on the bike. Even normal riders would feel hampered by training wheels if they remained on the bike.
In the same way the Law is not the same thing as love, and when operating from a place of love and righteousness we are able to move beyond Law, and at times even perform acts that might be seen as breaking that Law if seen only from the perspective of the Law itself, and not from the perspective of the righteousness to which the Law points.
This is why Jesus (operating from true righteousness) could set aside portions of the Law in certain circumstances, and even revise whole portions of it in others, while at the same time proclaiming that He was not doing away with it.
2.05.2010
Training Wheels Pt II
because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.
Romans 8:2-4
==========================
Previously we quoted Dr Willard saying, "the Law is, has been, and always will be, the course of righteousness..."
However, he finishes that sentence by saying, "but the Law is not, never has been, and never will be, the source of righteousness!"
Training wheels are not the source of bike riding skill, or the ability to travel from point A to point B, or to navigate a route. Those skills come from some other place. The training wheels are a guide, pointing towards 'upright.'
The Law performs a similar function. It is not able to create people of righteousness, people cannot become good by obeying the Law, but by obeying the Law they are kept from 'falling over.' It is a way of staying alive long enough to actually learn righteousness. You will not learn how to ride a bike if you cannot stay upright, and training wheels are an aid to this; you cannot learn to be righteous if you are breaking the Law, and so obedience is an aid to righteousness, but not its source...
Christ is the source, the Law is the course. Jesus is the method for making men righteous. He transforms hearts by His Spirit, He 'writes the law on the tablets of our hearts.'
==========================
For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word, in the statement, " YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."
But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.
Galatians 5:14, 18, 22-26
2.03.2010
Training Wheels Pt I
We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
1 Timothy 1:8-11
=====================
The Law is like a set of training wheels. They are for people who don't know how to ride a bike, not for people who do. The Law is for people who are unrighteous, not for the righteous.
This, of course, doesn't mean that 'the righteous' can break the law, anymore than people who know how to ride a bike should try to tip over sideways now that the training wheels are no longer in the way. Rather, 'the righteous' will live according to the law without trying! There is no 'obedience' necessary for those whose natural course of action is 'righteousness,' just as one who knows how to ride a bike will remain upright without the training wheels to hold them up.
As Dr Willard says, "The Law is, has been, and always will be, the course of righteousness..."
=====================
Until the time when we were mature enough to respond freely in faith to the living God, we were carefully surrounded and protected by the Mosaic law. The law was like those Greek tutors, with which you are familiar, who escort children to school and protect them from danger or distraction, making sure the children will really get to the place they set out for.
Galatians 3:23-24
1 Timothy 1:8-11
=====================
The Law is like a set of training wheels. They are for people who don't know how to ride a bike, not for people who do. The Law is for people who are unrighteous, not for the righteous.
This, of course, doesn't mean that 'the righteous' can break the law, anymore than people who know how to ride a bike should try to tip over sideways now that the training wheels are no longer in the way. Rather, 'the righteous' will live according to the law without trying! There is no 'obedience' necessary for those whose natural course of action is 'righteousness,' just as one who knows how to ride a bike will remain upright without the training wheels to hold them up.
As Dr Willard says, "The Law is, has been, and always will be, the course of righteousness..."
=====================
Until the time when we were mature enough to respond freely in faith to the living God, we were carefully surrounded and protected by the Mosaic law. The law was like those Greek tutors, with which you are familiar, who escort children to school and protect them from danger or distraction, making sure the children will really get to the place they set out for.
Galatians 3:23-24
4.17.2008
Luther's Success...
Luther has been famous for many things, one of which is his disapproval of a few of the New Testament letters, notably James. He contemplated removing the book of James from the cannon of Scripture. He disliked the emphasis that James placed upon action, feeling that it cast a doubtful light upon the reformation battle cry 'salvation through faith.'
It seems, at least in my estimation, that he succeeded in that regard.
James' letter is still in our Bibles (and not even in a separate section at the end of the Bible as Luther did in some of his translations), but it's 'teeth have been pulled.' I have heard it interpretted away on numerous occasions, and even heard one radio preacher flatly contradict some of the things he read from it; yet one has only to look at the Church to see that 'grace' has become a thinly veiled code for a life of self-focus.
Luther has indeed succeeded.
(Okay, okay, so I am judging him outside of historical context, my diatribe isn't aimed at him, it is aimed at us!)
It seems, at least in my estimation, that he succeeded in that regard.
James' letter is still in our Bibles (and not even in a separate section at the end of the Bible as Luther did in some of his translations), but it's 'teeth have been pulled.' I have heard it interpretted away on numerous occasions, and even heard one radio preacher flatly contradict some of the things he read from it; yet one has only to look at the Church to see that 'grace' has become a thinly veiled code for a life of self-focus.
Luther has indeed succeeded.
(Okay, okay, so I am judging him outside of historical context, my diatribe isn't aimed at him, it is aimed at us!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)