If we take the Bible literally, why don’t we put adulterers to death as commanded in the Old Testament?
College professor to freshman with Christian background: “If we take the Bible literally, and if Leviticus 20:10-13 and other passages teach it’s wrong for certain sexual behaviors, why don’t we put them to death as it commands?
“The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress, shall surely be put to death. The man who lies with his father’s wife has uncovered his father’s nakedness, both of them shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them. If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death. They have committed perversion. Their blood shall be upon them. If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put do death. Their blood shall be upon them.”
There is confusion and now accusations of misapplication and ignorance over this and other Bible passages, as applied to sexuality and homosexuality, as well as other issues because we really don’t put people to death for these things; why not?
First, many readers are aware that the Christian Bible is made up of two components, the much larger Old Testament, and the New. The New Testament is 1/4 the size of the old if you bunch the pages between your fingers.
Christians universally for 2000 years have acknowledged the Bible, of the Old and New Testaments. Probably the only exception is a few extra books included in the Old Testament used traditionally by those of the Roman Catholic Church. They are known as the Apocryphal books.
The question if the Bible is to be taken literally is the larger question here. (I have addressed that in previous posts too.)
This only recently became an issue. Some people now object to what has been called the Holy Bible. Instead some have gone so far as separating them into what they call the Jewish scriptures, and the Christian’s scriptures.
Many also have known that the religion of Judaism uses the Old Testament as their Scripture, but do not acknowledge the other “New Testament” as holy writ.
The Moslem religion acknowledges many of the personalities of the Old Testament as prophets, and messengers, such as Adam, Abraham, Moses etc. but doesn’t acknowledge the book as a whole. Some have said they believe the book is corrupted.
Our subject is specifically the Old Testament, and it’s use and interpretation. This preacher realizes the enormous scope of this subject. Many doctoral thesis and literally thousands of pages have been published on this.
Jesus Christ
The key here in this discussion is the Person of Jesus Christ, His approach, bodily fulfillment, and teaching on the Old Testament, both in terms of it’s history and theology. Following this, then the teaching of His Holy Apostles as recorded in their writings.
Jesus Christ is the promised prophesied, Lamb of God of the Old Testament—the true and only Messiah. He is both God’s Son as well as the second Person of the Godhead.
Prophetically, Jesus regards Himself as literal fulfillment of many, perhaps hundreds, of Old Testament predictions from His birth, His ministry and teaching, His death burial and resurrection.
Pause a moment and digest that sentence.
While the Old Testament stands on it’s own; it is also read in view of the New Testament. The word ‘testament’ itself is biblical and indicates a change in form and function—hence “New”. John chapters one through four and the sermon-on-the-mount recorded in Matthew Mark and Luke illustrate just a portion of Jesus teaching on the Old Testament.
The New Testament Authors
The words found in the epistle to the Hebrews chapters 7-10 are a very clear summary of the Old Testament sacrificial laws in view of Christ’s ministry and death. They literally state that many of these laws are no longer in force due to Jesus Christ’s sacrificial death, burial and resurrection.
Negatively, we cannot arbitrarily decide which laws to keep and disregard. Jesus Himself and His Apostles endorsed what is designated as the 10 commandments.
As Jesus preached, he spoke clearly about how the Old Testament was to be interpreted as already cited in the sermon-on-the-mount. Another was his stern rebuke of the hypocritical Scribes and Pharisees, who were groups of religious teachers themselves.
The Apostles were met with the question of keeping the Old Testament laws early in the history of the church. This is recorded for us in the book of Acts. Two situations come to mind. One was regarding circumcision, a required practice in the Old Testament for Jewish boys, and the eating of certain foods and the withholding of others. In both cases, as the Apostles met in Acts 16 on these issues, they concluded that following the Law of circumcision wasn’t necessary, nor was abstaining from certain foods. See also Acts 10 when the Lord Himself convinced Peter that it was okay to eat “unclean” foods forbidden in the Old Testament.
Old Testament Itself Predicts New
The Old Testament itself speaks of a “New Covenant” which supercedes the Old. That is from the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the destruction of the city of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in 586 BC. Chapters 31:31-34
The Scripture itself, Christ Jesus Himself, literally state that the Old Testament, while still in effect, would be re-applied in view of the New. We still use it. In fact the value and teaching of the Old Testament have not been diminished. In fact the contrary is true, they are enhanced, and now interpreted correctly. Christ and His apostles serve as our example for interpreting these passages, for our everyday lives.
The New Testament biblical authors distinguish between the 10 Commandments given in Exodus 19 from Mount Sinai, and what’s known as Levitical laws, both civil and ceremonial which followed.
We are not the Jewish nation under those laws. So the punishments such as stoning, piercing etc. are no longer practiced. Jesus didn’t prescribe stoning for the adulterous woman in John 4 as prescribed by the law. It must be noted that he didn’t vindicate her either, saying “Go and sin no more.”
Now the teaching itself on this issue remains consistent with the new. Adultery, and sexual sin, whatever the type are still just that. The designation of sin still carries over. But the difference is the sacrifice for sin. In the Old Testament, the sacrifice was an animal. Now it’s the precious Lamb of God—Jesus—dying on Calvary’s cross for all sin and sinners. And in repentance and through faith, not of works, these receive complete and full forgiveness from God. This forgiveness is the much sought after cancellation of that horrible unpayable debt.
The professor who supposedly used these passages in a class as an “Aha” moment to the students was setting up a “straw man” He was taking advantage of uninformed pupils for his advantage and the justification of a cause. That is unfortunate.
Now You know.
That’s what I know, a poor-part-time Country preacher.
College professor to freshman with Christian background: “If we take the Bible literally, and if Leviticus 20:10-13 and other passages teach it’s wrong for certain sexual behaviors, why don’t we put them to death as it commands?
“The man who commits adultery with another man’s wife, he who commits adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress, shall surely be put to death. The man who lies with his father’s wife has uncovered his father’s nakedness, both of them shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them. If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death. They have committed perversion. Their blood shall be upon them. If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put do death. Their blood shall be upon them.”
There is confusion and now accusations of misapplication and ignorance over this and other Bible passages, as applied to sexuality and homosexuality, as well as other issues because we really don’t put people to death for these things; why not?
First, many readers are aware that the Christian Bible is made up of two components, the much larger Old Testament, and the New. The New Testament is 1/4 the size of the old if you bunch the pages between your fingers.
Christians universally for 2000 years have acknowledged the Bible, of the Old and New Testaments. Probably the only exception is a few extra books included in the Old Testament used traditionally by those of the Roman Catholic Church. They are known as the Apocryphal books.
The question if the Bible is to be taken literally is the larger question here. (I have addressed that in previous posts too.)
This only recently became an issue. Some people now object to what has been called the Holy Bible. Instead some have gone so far as separating them into what they call the Jewish scriptures, and the Christian’s scriptures.
Many also have known that the religion of Judaism uses the Old Testament as their Scripture, but do not acknowledge the other “New Testament” as holy writ.
The Moslem religion acknowledges many of the personalities of the Old Testament as prophets, and messengers, such as Adam, Abraham, Moses etc. but doesn’t acknowledge the book as a whole. Some have said they believe the book is corrupted.
Our subject is specifically the Old Testament, and it’s use and interpretation. This preacher realizes the enormous scope of this subject. Many doctoral thesis and literally thousands of pages have been published on this.
Jesus Christ
The key here in this discussion is the Person of Jesus Christ, His approach, bodily fulfillment, and teaching on the Old Testament, both in terms of it’s history and theology. Following this, then the teaching of His Holy Apostles as recorded in their writings.
Jesus Christ is the promised prophesied, Lamb of God of the Old Testament—the true and only Messiah. He is both God’s Son as well as the second Person of the Godhead.
Prophetically, Jesus regards Himself as literal fulfillment of many, perhaps hundreds, of Old Testament predictions from His birth, His ministry and teaching, His death burial and resurrection.
Pause a moment and digest that sentence.
While the Old Testament stands on it’s own; it is also read in view of the New Testament. The word ‘testament’ itself is biblical and indicates a change in form and function—hence “New”. John chapters one through four and the sermon-on-the-mount recorded in Matthew Mark and Luke illustrate just a portion of Jesus teaching on the Old Testament.
The New Testament Authors
The words found in the epistle to the Hebrews chapters 7-10 are a very clear summary of the Old Testament sacrificial laws in view of Christ’s ministry and death. They literally state that many of these laws are no longer in force due to Jesus Christ’s sacrificial death, burial and resurrection.
Negatively, we cannot arbitrarily decide which laws to keep and disregard. Jesus Himself and His Apostles endorsed what is designated as the 10 commandments.
As Jesus preached, he spoke clearly about how the Old Testament was to be interpreted as already cited in the sermon-on-the-mount. Another was his stern rebuke of the hypocritical Scribes and Pharisees, who were groups of religious teachers themselves.
The Apostles were met with the question of keeping the Old Testament laws early in the history of the church. This is recorded for us in the book of Acts. Two situations come to mind. One was regarding circumcision, a required practice in the Old Testament for Jewish boys, and the eating of certain foods and the withholding of others. In both cases, as the Apostles met in Acts 16 on these issues, they concluded that following the Law of circumcision wasn’t necessary, nor was abstaining from certain foods. See also Acts 10 when the Lord Himself convinced Peter that it was okay to eat “unclean” foods forbidden in the Old Testament.
Old Testament Itself Predicts New
The Old Testament itself speaks of a “New Covenant” which supercedes the Old. That is from the prophet Jeremiah, who lived through the destruction of the city of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in 586 BC. Chapters 31:31-34
The Scripture itself, Christ Jesus Himself, literally state that the Old Testament, while still in effect, would be re-applied in view of the New. We still use it. In fact the value and teaching of the Old Testament have not been diminished. In fact the contrary is true, they are enhanced, and now interpreted correctly. Christ and His apostles serve as our example for interpreting these passages, for our everyday lives.
The New Testament biblical authors distinguish between the 10 Commandments given in Exodus 19 from Mount Sinai, and what’s known as Levitical laws, both civil and ceremonial which followed.
We are not the Jewish nation under those laws. So the punishments such as stoning, piercing etc. are no longer practiced. Jesus didn’t prescribe stoning for the adulterous woman in John 4 as prescribed by the law. It must be noted that he didn’t vindicate her either, saying “Go and sin no more.”
Now the teaching itself on this issue remains consistent with the new. Adultery, and sexual sin, whatever the type are still just that. The designation of sin still carries over. But the difference is the sacrifice for sin. In the Old Testament, the sacrifice was an animal. Now it’s the precious Lamb of God—Jesus—dying on Calvary’s cross for all sin and sinners. And in repentance and through faith, not of works, these receive complete and full forgiveness from God. This forgiveness is the much sought after cancellation of that horrible unpayable debt.
The professor who supposedly used these passages in a class as an “Aha” moment to the students was setting up a “straw man” He was taking advantage of uninformed pupils for his advantage and the justification of a cause. That is unfortunate.
Now You know.
That’s what I know, a poor-part-time Country preacher.
