6.27.2009

Lawbreaker

Something has been swirling around in my head...what precisely is the role of "The Law" for Christians? I got my shackles up recently by Christians who still insist we must apply the Law , or aspects of the Law, to our lives, even if it is not loving to do so. So, I chose to dig around a bit about the law, both as documented in the Old Testament, and as referred to in the New. What is it's purpose for those who follow Christ? Eventually, I had a revelation. This may not be new to you, but it's new to me, so humor me.

If we read the bible with the idea that it documents a life, the life of the people of God, we see an interesting pattern; especially in light of God's portrayal of himself as divine parent. Our parents give birth to us, give us life, bring us into the world, create us. When we are infants, our parents care for our every need. They feed us and clothe us, keep us safe. As children, we begin to explore our environment and must be told to do this, and not to do that in order that we might learn to be caring of others, healthy and safe. As we grow into adolescence, we are taught more about having the correct motive behind our actions, love, care, wisdom, than we are told precisely what to do. We then go off into life enabled to make loving and healthy decisions on our own, no longer needing the minutiae of rules. Eventually we come to the close of life and meet with our demise, which really is only one kind of death, entering into a new kind of life.

It's an imperfect metaphor in some ways; imperfect because human life is imperfect, not because God's divine parenting is imperfect.

I see the Law as having been God's divine parenting; giving birth to humanity and initially caring for them in a "bubble" of safety and love during their infancy. As youth, they become more independent, exploring the boundaries of their environment. They are then given rules, instructed in the ways that will move them toward the goal of caring for and respecting others. As an adolescent people, it was time to teach them to make decisions out of right motives, rather than just because they are instructed to, and to set them free as adults equipped with this wisdom. When Jesus came and fulfilled the law and died, one of the outcomes was the realization that his example of love would be our motivator in life, and through and because of that, caring and respect would naturally follow without a detailed set of instructions. As a tangential aside, I have also thought about at what level we intervene in our children's lives as when they are young, versus how likely we are to intervene as they mature into adulthood. But that's another post.

According to Matthew Henry, the Law's purpose was to mandate behaviors that were loving. In Matthew 5 we are told that Jesus came to fulfill the Law; that is, to set into motion that which the law was trying to accomplish in the people; Love. In Matthew 22 we are told that in Jesus' own words, the most important laws are those about loving God and loving others, and that all the law and the prophets hang on these two. In fact, Jesus himself goes so far as to break the law, (working on the Sabbath, for instance) saying that if it is more loving or merciful to do something even if it is breaking the law, then do so; for the keeping of the law does not atone for an unmerciful act. Love supersedes the law.

So, then, setting my heresy meter to 100, I come to the conclusion that as human beings in the adulthood of Christianity, we ought to know that anything that is loving or merciful towards another human is more important than anything the Law says about that issue/behavior. Jesus, by his Spirit, imparted to us the mandate to Love, and the ability and necessary wisdom to do so; while granting us the freedom to Love with abandon. If the Law's purpose was to mandate love and its natural results (mercy, generosity, kindness...fruits of the Spirit stuff), and Jesus ,with his example of love, fulfilled that purpose...then I would reason that any act of love, even if it contradicts the law, is more right than keeping the law if it would mean forgoing the love.

I would love to hear any thoughts on these things. I realize I'm mostly preaching to the choir here, but it's something I've been thinking about.

If you are new to my blog, remember this when commenting: Every view is welcome and will be heard, however, please be kind.

Peace out.


10 comments:

  1. The scriptures say that the law was our schoolmaster to lead us to Christ -- or according to the book of Tyler, "Take one look at the law and you'll figure out in a jiffy that you need to go running to Christ."

    The Holy Spirit, by changing us into mature Christians, does a work of love within us that naturally conforms us to the law -- namely, love God, and love your neighbor. That is why grace is above the law, it is a "super law" because those who are ultra mature go way, way, way beyond the law just because love compels them.

    For instance, the tithe -- which is taught incorrectly anyway, especially firstfruits -- it becomes meaningless when we are compelled, by love, to share our resources with all in need and to share lovingly with those who teach us. Love does NOT get out a calculator. Love has no idea how much it has given! Love does not care.

    Earlier in my walk, the Lord DID direct me to conform to the law in many areas as a schoolteacher to wean me into grace, because by my upbringing, well there was just no way for me to go straight to grace. I could not have handled it. Grace is harder than law!!! Grace required having been loved, it requires knowing how to trust, so for me the law was a safety net He, in His love, allowed me to have. Like training wheels lol.
    ReplyDelete
  2. Paul used a very similar analogy to yours in Galatians 4, saying that the law functioned as a "guardian" to us "when we were children" until the "fullness of time came." Yes, the metaphor is imperfect (as all metaphors are), but I think this is a healthy and Biblical way to view the Law in general. So on this point, the heresy meter reads "0". :) (Heresy meter--I like that.)

    The only thing I'd add at this point (to help *keep* the heresy meter low)..chuckle...is that God is love, and has *always been* love. This means He is love when He shows mercy, He is love when He gives the law, and He is even love when He renders judgment (which means basically a reckoning or decision). It is hard to get our minds around because of our preconceived notions of what love is and does...but I believe everything God did throughout Scripture, He did in love, with a redemptive purpose for mankind. Even the really harsh stuff. Because He never stops *being* love.

    My point is not to say when one should keep the law or when one should "break" it...just that we should not box in our mindsets of how love responds. Love gives grace, and love shows mercy; but love, grace and mercy are not synonyms. There is a time when love disciplines. There is a time when love confronts. Love is not always "nice." There is not a set formula to define the actions of love, and when we try to create such a formula of what love would and would not do, I think that's where we can get into trouble. On one extreme, it takes us into everything-goes; on the other, into harsh legalism in the *name* of love.

    I like to put it this way...love always does what is *best* for the other person in that moment. (And may God guide us to know what the moment requires.) :)

    Way to make the mind grind early on a Sunday morning.... :D
    ReplyDelete
  3. Well Jeff, here is another example of parental love coming through in discipline --

    I LOVE to beat my kids senseless when they break a law

    ROFL
    ReplyDelete
  4. Hmm... Hebrews 8 was a chapter that hit my Pentecostal/Charismatic upbringing up side the head.

    It is the chapter that talks about how Jesus is now our High Priest...

    "But Jesus' priestly work far surpasses what these other priests do, since he's working from a far better plan. If the first plan—the old covenant—had worked out, a second wouldn't have been needed. But we know the first was found wanting, because God said,

    Heads up! The days are coming
    when I'll set up a new plan
    for dealing with Israel and Judah.
    I'll throw out the old plan
    I set up with their ancestors
    when I led them by the hand out of Egypt.
    They didn't keep their part of the bargain,
    so I looked away and let it go.
    This new plan I'm making with Israel
    isn't going to be written on paper,
    isn't going to be chiseled in stone;
    This time I'm writing out the plan in them,
    carving it on the lining of their hearts.
    I'll be their God,
    they'll be my people.
    They won't go to school to learn about me,
    or buy a book called God in Five Easy Lessons.
    They'll all get to know me firsthand,
    the little and the big, the small and the great.
    They'll get to know me by being kindly forgiven,
    with the slate of their sins forever wiped clean.
    By coming up with a new plan, a new covenant between God and his people, God put the old plan on the shelf. And there it stays, gathering dust." Hebrews 8:6-13 (The Message)


    Those last two sentences really jolted me out of the idea that we must still live under portions of the Law. My old pastor used to teach that unless the New Testament expressly did away with a specific portion of the Law (i.e., circumcision, animal sacrifice), it was still in effect. Sigh.

    Well, "on a shelf gathering dust" pretty much does away with the whole thing, yeah?. There is a New Covenant in town and it has made the Old one "obsolete", as the Amplified version translates it. It is not very ambiguous is it? And I don't think Paul meant for it to be. :D
    ReplyDelete
  5. As others have said, I think what you are describing is found in Galatians 3:24-25 it says, “So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.”
    ReplyDelete
  6. Great post. Great comments. The verse that came to mind as I read what you wrote was the one in Galatians to which Susan referred.
    ReplyDelete
  7. Tyler - I like your point about the "super law". That's really what I'm getting at...that if we truly love, it will go beyond the letter of the law.
    ReplyDelete
  8. I think you make a great point, Jeff. In all the things we don't understand about God, I think love is the doozy. For if he was always loving (as to the seemingly harsh events in the OT) we have to accept either a) he really wasn't loving or b)he WAS being loving but our comprehension of that is so limited that we cannot understand it.

    I will admit there have been times when I haven't been able to believe God was always acting lovingly...but this is where I have to accept that "he knows what he's doing".

    However, as well, I do still find myself leaning toward the belief that the OT was written by people who could only understand and relate to God in the context of their culture and lives -- as is true of us and all people throughout history, but since they were the ones who wrote the scriptures, it's exceedingly important -- so that what might make sense to them may not make sense to us.
    ReplyDelete
  9. Katherine - I wholeheartedly agree. I think Jesus' point was that we cannot any longer think in terms of the law, because what he brought us is so much greater. Isn't it said somewhere that if a person keeps part of the law (in the hopes that the law will redeem him) he must keep the entire law? And so we are much better off with love and grace.
    ReplyDelete
  10. Thanks Susan and Gary. I find myself exhausted by the Christians who still beat people up over the specifics of the law, as if we must hold onto it AND onto Jesus, and somehow I struggle to see how both are possible.
    ReplyDelete