confused about OT and NT directives

[rachel4]

Hi everyone! I have some confusion over Biblical directives given in the OT and NT. I've always been taught if a directive is given in the OT and NT its still valid for us as Christians to follow today. So, for example, the OT says adultery is wrong, the NT says adultery is wrong, so adultery is still considered wrong for Christians to engage in today. Dietary laws were given in the OT, but the NT does away with them, so Christians today are not under dietary restrictions. Is this a correct, if perhaps overly simplistic, way to view Biblical directives?

Thanks,
Sister Rachel

[robertcolumbia]

I believe that is correct. Christians are not subject to the ceremonial Jewish laws (kosher, circumcision, etc.) Acts 15 records the decision of the Church regarding non-Jewish believers and the Jewish law.

Commandments such as do not steal, do not murder, and do not commit adultery still apply to Christians.

[rachel]

This sounds about what I think, too. My question is, if something is said in the Old Testament to be wrong, or you're told to do something, and there's absolutely no mention either way in the New Testament, does what the OT says still apply? Does this make sense?
Thanks,
from the other Rachel.

[robertcolumbia]

I've been taught that the OT laws are twofold. There is a moral code that consists of the Ten Commandments and things of that ilk such as not committing murder, theft, or adultery as I mentioned above. There are also ceremonial laws such as the Jewish dietary code, some rules of OT Jewish dress such as not wearing clothes made from different fabrics or needing to wear tassels or fringes that not repeated in the NT, and the rules regarding animal sacrifices. (where, when, how). Also, there are some commandments in the OT that are basic laws regarding the structure and civil practices and policies of the ancient Jewish nation and it's administration and were basically the equivalent to local criminal and civil law, both substantive and procedural (e.g. the OT explains that two witnesses were required for some criminal prosecutions).

So, if a law is mentioned in the OT but not in the NT (i.e., the NT doesn't specifically condemn it, but also doesn't specifically say that it's OK for Christians), the question may turn to whether or not the OT law that you are thinking about is a moral law or a ceremonial or administrative one.

Are you thinking of a specific OT law that you are concerned as to whether or not you should be following, or are you wondering in a more general sense?

[rachel]

More in a general sense. A couple of times I've run across it in a more specific sense but I can't think of a specific example right now.

[Brother Ben]

Bro. Robert, pretty much summed it up. I would like to add, what the N.T. does NOT reapply, i.e., no murder, adultry, etc., in word, it often repeats in principle. This can be hard for some people, because they do not have a heart set on "searching out" the gems in God's scriptural storehouse.

Here's a good case point: Should women wear pants or slacks? Where does it say, (or imply) that?

"The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God." Deut. 22:5

Did this command get repeated in the N.T.? No. But, (you knew I'd say that.) we do have principles to be considered. Paul did say:

"In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;" 1 Tim. 2:9

If one cares to do some word study, they'll soon find that the word that our English word comes from, "apparel," is the word, katastolç. Let's break it into two pieces:

kata, which means to let down, to hang down, refering to garments, and

stole, which is like our word, stole, (like a mink stole,) Now, notice it's definition:

stole, n
1. Ecclesiastical A long scarf, usually of embroidered silk or linen, worn over the left shoulder by deacons and over both shoulders by priests and bishops while officiating.
2. A woman's long scarf of cloth or fur worn about the shoulders.
3. A long robe or outer garment worn by matrons in ancient Rome.

[Middle English, from Old English, from Latin stola, garment, robe, from Greek stol; see stel- in Indo-European roots.]

Interesting, the Greek word, katastele means to quiet down. When a sister isn't careful about how she dresses, her outfit is screaming, "LOOK AT ME!" louder than her profession says, "Don't."

So, from these words, we can see that a sister is to wear modest garments, that hang down, and cover like a long robe. Does a pair of Levi's fit that description? No. So, though Paul never said, "Thou shalt not wear pants," (which many have to have before they will consider it,) he did use words, (by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit,) that would show us what a Christian sister should dress like.

This would be how N.T. principle reconciles with an O.T. command that is not repaeated in the N.T.