Understanding OT Law: Abrogation?

Hi Steve, thanks for your post

I think the pork taboo in Islam would be viewed as one of the things that continued from one era to the next...similar to the view that many Christians have about the Ten Commandments that 9 continued, but Sabbath dropped (along with many of the other particular laws in Torah).

Of course, this view is by no means universal among Christians.

But really, what does Christ's "not a jot or tittle" mean? Sometimes I hear Paul's analogy of marriage brought in...not that the law passed away, but we passed away relative to it when we were burried with Christ in baptism. Of course, the pracitcal application is still the same--whether we view the law as "passed away" or we are "passed away" relative to it, the end result is that we are not held accountable for following it.

Even in the Tanakh there were "changes" in the Law, though I'm not sure if we should consider them substantive. For example, Torah speaks only of the Tabernacle, nothing of the temple...and when David suggests building the temple, he is initially rebuffed in God's response that he never asked for one. Nevertheless, the Temple came and replaced the Tabernacle. However, as I say, this may not be a real material change as the same services that took place in the Tabernacle now took place in the Temple.

I look forward to more discussion.

Peace,

Daniel

EDIT: Also, if one views Ezekiel's temple vision as something to be literally fulfilled in a future date, the services there seem to be not identical to Temple worship as it was historically practiced. Again, were these differences substantive? And even if they weren't, would any changes be considered ok?

i read this post a few days ago and have been giving it some thought. I don't believe the Islamic concept of abrogation is applicable to the Bible, primarily because the Bible is a completed work. let me explain.

Scripture chronicles God's relationship with man, from creation (Gen.) to destruction (Rev.) in doing so, it provides guidlines for man to follow in order to have a proper relationship with God. the problem is sin, which causes a break in said relationship. the solution, initially, was the Law.

In the Law, we find that in order to bridge the gap, a blood sacrifice was required. this theme, blood for sin, follows through right up into the NT (for the wages of sin is death...Rm. 6:23) the rites for sacrifice were very specific, requiring a whole order of priests to ensure that things were done properly. the thing is, those sacrifices were never enough. they had to be repeated endlessly, until Christ.

In Him was found the perfect sacrifice. not a blemish was on Him. He lived His life in accordance with every letter of the Law. Indeed, He told us that He came to fulfill the Law, which He did on the Cross. Finally, the sin gap was bridged forever. Now, the only reason He was able to do this is because He was God. Man had already shown himself incapable of keeping even one command (Gen. 3), but now God Himself intervened to provid a path back to Himself.

With that work completed, what was left to be said? advice on how a follower of Christ should live, and included in there is a preview of things to come. the circle is closed, so to speak. If you can accept the Bible as God's Word, why would we need another "revelation"? simply put, we don't, so anything that comes after (Islam, JW's LDS, etc) must be false.

at least that's how I answer a Muslim who brings the question to me. hope this was helpful!

__________________
THRESHHOLD THRESHHOLD TAKE US TO THE THRESHHOLD!!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.