In a discussion on non-Christian religions the Muslim principal of "abrogation" was brought up. The basic theory is that a later revelation of God could "abrogate" or replace a prior revelation. For examle, God could at one time permit one thing and then later forbid it, or vice-versa?
My question is this: do you see this as being a Biblical concept as well? Do you think that certain laws have been "abrogated"--for example, the Sabbath, clean/unclean foods, wearing of certain clothing forbidden, etc?
I am not sure if we could compare the Quranic understanding of "abrogation" to the Law of God that was revealed to Moses, but where we also say that Christ had fulfilled. Islamic sense of abrogation clearly appears that the deity Allah has a better solution to the issue now, or has changed his mind, but in our faith it is completing, such as Christ's words saying, "you have been told... But now I tell you this" with authority, it is not in the same sense of islamic abrogation, canceling commandments per se.
__________________ ...And by His stripes we are healed...
I am not sure if we could compare the Quranic understanding of "abrogation" to the Law of God that was revealed to Moses, but where we also say that Christ had fulfilled. Islamic sense of abrogation clearly appears that the deity Allah has a better solution to the issue now, or has changed his mind, but in our faith it is completing, such as Christ's words saying, "you have been told... But now I tell you this" with authority, it is not in the same sense of islamic abrogation, canceling commandments per se.
Thanks for your post, Bushmaster
Effectively, what is the practical difference between "completing" vs. "cancelling"? It seems to me that if an old law (in whole or in part--some might seperate the 10 commandments from the rest of the law) has been "completed", then the practical meaning is that what was forbidden once is now allowed (and sometimes vice-versa, such as divorce)--which doesn't seem terribly different in effect (though perhaps in theological meaning) from Islamic "abrogation".
I would like to agree with Luzeiro, that islamic teaching of abrogation is not the issue with OT laws and Christ's interpretation of them. Practically, it appears to be in the same category as you suggest, (of course not theologically) but when Christ says "you have been told this, now I am telling you this" usually there is a deeper concern while this concern is not the point of islamic abrogation. Islamic abrogation appears more like an edit of the text, while Christ's instructions are signs of authority.
__________________ ...And by His stripes we are healed...
I would like to agree with Luzeiro, that islamic teaching of abrogation is not the issue with OT laws and Christ's interpretation of them. Practically, it appears to be in the same category as you suggest, (of course not theologically) but when Christ says "you have been told this, now I am telling you this" usually there is a deeper concern while this concern is not the point of islamic abrogation. Islamic abrogation appears more like an edit of the text, while Christ's instructions are signs of authority.
Thanks for your post, Bushmaster
I'm not sure if I would just say that Christ "interpreted" the law. I think actual change is indicated in at least some of what he said (or later, what the inspired NT writers like Paul wrote). Indeed, the writer of Hebrews wrote about change in the law (Heb 7:12).
Some changes are obvious--no circumcision required, for example. But it's a real change, not just a clarification or interpretation. Now, how this relates to Jesus' statement about "not a jot or tittle" changing "until all is fulfilled" is an interesting question. Some will argue that refers only to the Ten Commandments (though there's some disagreement on the Sabbath--did it change from Saturday to Sunday?). Others say that it is the whole law, but the "all fulfilled" was when Jesus said "it is finished [completed]" on the cross. The dilema for this position is that it makes Matthew recording a statement of no relevance to the Christian today, nor at the time of his writing.
Any way, your continued thoughts (and other posters) would be appreciated.
I'm not sure if I would just say that Christ "interpreted" the law.
Of course we are not speaking of a personal "interpretation" in this case. He gave us the truth of God's Law, being God Himself, only correct application would come from Him.
Some changes are obvious--no circumcision required, for example. But it's a real change, not just a clarification or interpretation.
Yes, a decision arrived at the council of Jerusalem, which I believe was presided by the Holy Spirit just as the other 7 ecumenical councils. However here, there is a decision based on Christ's teachings on the status of Gentiles. Can we say it was abrogation in the sense of Islamic application?
Now, how this relates to Jesus' statement about "not a jot or tittle" changing "until all is fulfilled" is an interesting question. Some will argue that refers only to the Ten Commandments (though there's some disagreement on the Sabbath--did it change from Saturday to Sunday?). Others say that it is the whole law, but the "all fulfilled" was when Jesus said "it is finished [completed]" on the cross. The dilema for this position is that it makes Matthew recording a statement of no relevance to the Christian today, nor at the time of his writing.
I don't think we should be necessarily in a dilemma for this. I would like to invite you to our forum at The Ancient Way and we can expound on it.
Any way, your continued thoughts (and other posters) would be appreciated.
No problem Daniel...
__________________ ...And by His stripes we are healed...
Of course we are not speaking of a personal "interpretation" in this case. He gave us the truth of God's Law, being God Himself, only correct application would come from Him.
Yes, a decision arrived at the council of Jerusalem, which I believe was presided by the Holy Spirit just as the other 7 ecumenical councils. However here, there is a decision based on Christ's teachings on the status of Gentiles. Can we say it was abrogation in the sense of Islamic application?
I don't think we should be necessarily in a dilemma for this. I would like to invite you to our forum at The Ancient Way and we can expound on it.
No problem Daniel...
Thanks for the invitation...but can't we just continue the discussion on this thread?
If so, how do you see resolution of the apparent dilemma of "jot and tittle" and changes such as no longer requiring circumcision? Although I appreciate the Orthodox position, I'd also like to hear from others.
Thanks for the invitation...but can't we just continue the discussion on this thread?
If so, how do you see resolution of the apparent dilemma of "jot and tittle" and changes such as no longer requiring circumcision? Although I appreciate the Orthodox position, I'd also like to hear from others.
Peace,
Daniel
Of course we can stay here but this area is not my best, also I would not want to get into a misleading position. We can have this thread stay here for others' responses. Drop by anytime for the Orthodox position in depth.
__________________ ...And by His stripes we are healed...
If the Quran advocated abrogation of previous scripture, why is there a pork taboo in Islam?
I suspect that Islam picked up the abrogation argument from the Christian world, who applied it to the OT. Marcion's canon did not include the OT (and several books of the NT also BTW.)
__________________ Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their consciences. –C.S. Lewis”
We should also consider the socio-political events surrounding Muhammad, and revelations being directly related to those events. While he was promoting his new religion, he offered peace, then when he faced opposition from Jews and Christians of the era, revelations did a 180-turn.
__________________ ...And by His stripes we are healed...
Linear Mode
