“Why bother with biblical law?” Jonathan has answered this challenging question in a profound, clear, and inspiring way.[1] I have also enjoyed James Bejon’s penetrating response.
Isaac Kikawada observed that the Prophets and Writings portions of the Hebrew Bible are based on the Torah (Pentateuch, traditionally known as the five books of Moses, which include the biblical law collections). Therefore, this Japanese scholar concluded that the three sections of the Hebrew Bible can be summarized as “Torah, Torah, Torah.”[2] Now in light of what Jonathan says, we could say that the New Testament is the fourth Torah section of the Christian Bible, continuing and based on the earlier biblical instructions (Hebrew torah means “instruction”), which constituted the Scripture for New Testament Christians (2 Tim 3:15-17).
The present response to Jonathan’s essay (1) lists five points that further support his affirmation of the ongoing relevance of biblical law for Christians and (2) engages with him on the challenging question of how to apply biblical law principles to modern society.
1. Further Support for Ongoing Relevance of Biblical Law[3]
First, while the Fall into sin (Gen 3) has disrupted God’s ideal for Planet Earth, the basic institutions of Sabbath, marriage, and work that he established at Creation (Gen 1-2) continue to form the basic framework for divine-human and human-human relationships. The principles of love for God and other human beings that are embodied in these institutions are exemplified in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20; Deut 5) and elaborated in other pentateuchal laws. Such laws, other Old Testament writings, and teachings of Jesus and New Testament writers progressively guide faulty people toward restoration of Creation ideals (e.g., Matt 19:3-9—higher standard for marriage, restricting divorce; Gal 3:28—equality). Jesus especially contributed to this upward moral trajectory by giving the supreme example of fulfilling the law (Matt 5:17) in his sinless life (1 Pet 1:21-23) and by revealing the deeper meanings of biblical laws, which penetrate to attitudes that can motivate actions (e.g., Matt 5:21-30).
Second, divine laws are not arbitrary, but “for your good” (Deut 10:13). If God is our Creator, as the Bible consistently affirms, he knows what is best for us, just as the manufacturer of a vehicle has the best understanding of its optimal maintenance. The Bible is our Manufacturer’s Handbook, which teaches us enduring principles of cause-and-effect that are in harmony with our nature for our personal and social well-being.[4] Thus, God’s laws are a gift of grace that promote life (Lev 18:5), although they cannot save us from negative consequences when we violate them. Only God’s mercy and grace that we accept through faith in Christ’s sacrifice can save us from such evil effects (Gal 3:10-14; Eph 2:1-10).
Third, biblical law is demonstrably superior to modern civil laws in several ways. In the laws of Exodus, for example, a thief must make restitution with a penalty to the individual from whom he has stolen. If he lacks the means to make reparation, “he shall be sold for his theft,” that is, he must work off his debt through labor (21:37; 22:2b-3 [English 22:1, 3b-4]). In any case, the economic resources of the victim are restored. Contrast current United States law, according to which theft is a crime against the state that is often punishable by incarceration (at the taxpayers’ expense!) and the victim may receive nothing.
Fourth, Jesus stated that “all the Law and the Prophets,” that is, the entire Old Testament, depend on God’s commandments to love him and to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt 22:37-40, citing Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18). Thus, God’s revelation, including through his laws, is based on love, which is his character (1 John 4:8, 16—“God is love”). This explains why sanctification—growth in holiness to emulate God’s character—is growth in love (1 Thess 3:12-13). God is eternal, so “Love never ends” (1 Cor 13:8). Therefore, the principles of love that underlie his law never end. As fallen human beings, our grasp of love is so deficient that it takes the entire Bible in both testaments to teach us what love is in all its details.
Fifth, faulty human beings need absolute standards of superior divine wisdom today more than ever. Many rely on false assurance of salvation (“Peace, peace, when there is no peace”; Jer 6:14; 8:11; cf. Ezek 13:10) for themselves and their family members by bowing to a “designer god” (a conceptual idol) of their own flawed creation, who adheres to a moral level that accommodates their sins, rather than mercifully transforming them to a higher level through spiritual “new birth” by the gift of the Holy Spirit provided by Christ (John 3:3-8; Rom 8:1-17; Titus 3:3-7). Saving faith works through love (Gal 5:6) as God defines “love,” as shown by the Bible, not as humans define it with their conscious or subconscious rationalizations. Subjective “political correctness” as the de facto moral compass of millions of people in the world is as unreliable and dangerous today as it was in the 1930’s in Nazi Germany.[5]
2. How to Apply Biblical Law Principles to Modern Society?
Jonathan describes his experience working with the Jubilee Policy Group and the Relational Justice project, which have sought to improve society in a secular state by applying biblical values and law to public life. Indeed, the influence of sensible biblical principles, such as redemptive punishment for crime and debt relief, can and does assist modern social leaders in finding solutions to widespread and difficult problems.
Jonathan also refers to “the Keep Sunday Special campaign which far-sightedly battled for a weekly day of rest in order to support hard-pressed families, provide employee protection, and place limits on what could be demanded from the environment.” The aims of this initiative sound noble and well-meaning, but James Bejon asks: “Why not a Keep Saturday Special campaign, or at the very least a Keep Saturday Night Through to Sunday Afternoon Special campaign?” Good question. There is a difference between (1) showing that wisdom from biblical laws can be adapted to needs of modern social circumstances in practical ways that benefit everyone (e.g., redemptive punishment for crime and debt relief) and (2) making legislation that privileges the religious beliefs of a certain group, even if that group is in the majority (e.g., Sunday laws) and even if such legislation has certain practical benefits. The largest and quite rapidly increasing number of people in the world today who observe the biblical seventh-day (Saturday) Sabbath[6] are Christians. Sunday laws could be unfair to them, as well as to many of other faiths, such as Jews and Muslims. Indeed, people need a weekly day of rest and the environment needs protection. But they also need freedom to choose their day of rest if this is a matter of conscience for them.
Jonathan states: “We are heavenly colonists and our job is to bring the life and rule of heaven to bear on earth. We are to do our best to order our civic life so that it matches the way things are done in heaven – ‘on earth as it is in heaven,’ as Jesus Himself taught.” However, we should also remember that the Christian church, God’s heavenly community on earth, is a church that relies on the power of influence to affect choices of those in outside society, rather than seeking to deploy coercion through state power. In a footnote (n. 17), Jonathan raises the question “in the light of the long history of Christendom – as to whether there should be a separation between Church and State.” In the light of such history and the New Testament, the answer to this question is an unequivocal “yes”—such separation is essential. The church is a theocracy, but the Bible describes the only true civil state theocracy in history: ancient Israel. Subsequent constructions of church-state pseudotheocracies, including in Christendom, have tended to yield gruesome results.
Indeed, Christians need to vigorously push back against neo-paganism that is sweeping through and saturating our modern society and leavening our church communities with destructive moral relativism. But we should do this in the New Testament Christian way exemplified by Jesus: through persuasion (including by example), rather than through force of legislation by the state.[7] We can work to convince non-Christians and nominal but secular “Christians” to apply biblical law principles, in ways that are adapted to modern life, because they work better than other principles in preserving individual and corporate well-being. Hopefully, such people will be drawn to our wise biblical God as a result (Deut 4:5-8). But if we try to impose what they perceive as religious rules based only on the authority of our God and his Word, which they do not really accept, we will be violating their religious freedom and giving them cause to resist.
This discussion raises a crucial question: Among the biblical laws, where is the line between (1) religious laws that Christians should keep to the extent that their principles remain applicable (not including Israelite ritual laws connected to the sanctuary on earth) and (2) ethical laws exemplifying values of general morality (e.g., respect for life and property) that are applicable to members of any well-functioning society, regardless of their religion? According to the biblical narrative framework, all the biblical laws were given by the one Creator-God, so in that sense, they all belong to his religion and observing them is a moral requirement for his followers. However, in a secular state where multiple faith or non-faith traditions are represented, it is the general ethical values reflected in biblical law that appropriately can be urged upon the society. Nevertheless, conflict can develop when Christians and others do not agree concerning the boundaries between general ethical principles and religious requirements for which individuals should be accountable only to God and in some cases to their churches.
Such conflict is currently manifested especially regarding sexuality and reproduction. It is clear that legislation should prohibit rape and incest, but what about abortion? Is the principle that life begins at conception merely a religious belief or is it a fact of life that general ethics should consider? Should legislation oppose homosexual activity, which is consistently condemned in the Bible, or should the state regard any problem with it as a religious matter and therefore ignore it (along with adultery) or support it by establishing homosexual “marriage”? If homosexual “marriage” is permitted, is it inconsistent to prohibit polygamy between consenting adults? It is one thing to acknowledge (as I do) that Christians should not engage in adultery, homosexual activity, or polygamy. But should we attempt to influence legislation on such matters, or should we confine our efforts to persuading others that sexually pure fulfillment within marriage is the only path to real and lasting happiness in this area of life?
Roy Gane is Professor of Hebrew Bible and ANE Languages, Andrews University.
[1] I have also appreciated insights in Jonathan Burnside’s book, God, Justice, and Society, which I have cited in some of my own publications on biblical law.
[2] Isaac Kikawada (University of California, Berkeley) presidential address at the 1986 Pacific Coast regional meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature at Santa Clara University in California.
[3] See also much of Roy E. Gane, Old Testament Law for Christians: Original Context and Enduring Application (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2017).
[4] See, for example, Roy E. Gane, “Social Justice,” in The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Law, ed. Pamela Barmash (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019), 19-34.
[5] Laura Schlessinger and Stewart Vogel, The Ten Commandments: The Significance of God’s Laws in Everyday Life (New York: Cliff Street Books, 1998), xxix.
[6] Jesus, the “lord of the Sabbath” (Matt 12:8; cf. Mark 2:28), affirmed the Sabbath of Creation (Mark 2:27) and the Decalogue by his example (Luke 4:16), reformed it at the risk of his life (Matt 12:9-14; John 5:2-18), and indicated that it would be in effect for his followers when people in Judea would need to flee at a later time (Matt 24:20), which was after his resurrection.
[7] See Gane, Old Testament Law for Christians, 163-68 for critique of the extreme approach of Christian Reconstructionists/Theonomists, who believe that modern nations should enforce adaptations of biblical civil laws, with their penalties.
“Why bother with biblical law?” Jonathan has answered this challenging question in a profound, clear, and inspiring way.[1] I have also enjoyed James Bejon’s penetrating response.
Isaac Kikawada observed that the Prophets and Writings portions of the Hebrew Bible are based on the Torah (Pentateuch, traditionally known as the five books of Moses, which include the biblical law collections). Therefore, this Japanese scholar concluded that the three sections of the Hebrew Bible can be summarized as “Torah, Torah, Torah.”[2] Now in light of what Jonathan says, we could say that the New Testament is the fourth Torah section of the Christian Bible, continuing and based on the earlier biblical instructions (Hebrew torah means “instruction”), which constituted the Scripture for New Testament Christians (2 Tim 3:15-17).
The present response to Jonathan’s essay (1) lists five points that further support his affirmation of the ongoing relevance of biblical law for Christians and (2) engages with him on the challenging question of how to apply biblical law principles to modern society.
1. Further Support for Ongoing Relevance of Biblical Law[3]
First, while the Fall into sin (Gen 3) has disrupted God’s ideal for Planet Earth, the basic institutions of Sabbath, marriage, and work that he established at Creation (Gen 1-2) continue to form the basic framework for divine-human and human-human relationships. The principles of love for God and other human beings that are embodied in these institutions are exemplified in the Ten Commandments (Exod 20; Deut 5) and elaborated in other pentateuchal laws. Such laws, other Old Testament writings, and teachings of Jesus and New Testament writers progressively guide faulty people toward restoration of Creation ideals (e.g., Matt 19:3-9—higher standard for marriage, restricting divorce; Gal 3:28—equality). Jesus especially contributed to this upward moral trajectory by giving the supreme example of fulfilling the law (Matt 5:17) in his sinless life (1 Pet 1:21-23) and by revealing the deeper meanings of biblical laws, which penetrate to attitudes that can motivate actions (e.g., Matt 5:21-30).
Second, divine laws are not arbitrary, but “for your good” (Deut 10:13). If God is our Creator, as the Bible consistently affirms, he knows what is best for us, just as the manufacturer of a vehicle has the best understanding of its optimal maintenance. The Bible is our Manufacturer’s Handbook, which teaches us enduring principles of cause-and-effect that are in harmony with our nature for our personal and social well-being.[4] Thus, God’s laws are a gift of grace that promote life (Lev 18:5), although they cannot save us from negative consequences when we violate them. Only God’s mercy and grace that we accept through faith in Christ’s sacrifice can save us from such evil effects (Gal 3:10-14; Eph 2:1-10).
Third, biblical law is demonstrably superior to modern civil laws in several ways. In the laws of Exodus, for example, a thief must make restitution with a penalty to the individual from whom he has stolen. If he lacks the means to make reparation, “he shall be sold for his theft,” that is, he must work off his debt through labor (21:37; 22:2b-3 [English 22:1, 3b-4]). In any case, the economic resources of the victim are restored. Contrast current United States law, according to which theft is a crime against the state that is often punishable by incarceration (at the taxpayers’ expense!) and the victim may receive nothing.
Fourth, Jesus stated that “all the Law and the Prophets,” that is, the entire Old Testament, depend on God’s commandments to love him and to “love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt 22:37-40, citing Deut 6:5 and Lev 19:18). Thus, God’s revelation, including through his laws, is based on love, which is his character (1 John 4:8, 16—“God is love”). This explains why sanctification—growth in holiness to emulate God’s character—is growth in love (1 Thess 3:12-13). God is eternal, so “Love never ends” (1 Cor 13:8). Therefore, the principles of love that underlie his law never end. As fallen human beings, our grasp of love is so deficient that it takes the entire Bible in both testaments to teach us what love is in all its details.
Fifth, faulty human beings need absolute standards of superior divine wisdom today more than ever. Many rely on false assurance of salvation (“Peace, peace, when there is no peace”; Jer 6:14; 8:11; cf. Ezek 13:10) for themselves and their family members by bowing to a “designer god” (a conceptual idol) of their own flawed creation, who adheres to a moral level that accommodates their sins, rather than mercifully transforming them to a higher level through spiritual “new birth” by the gift of the Holy Spirit provided by Christ (John 3:3-8; Rom 8:1-17; Titus 3:3-7). Saving faith works through love (Gal 5:6) as God defines “love,” as shown by the Bible, not as humans define it with their conscious or subconscious rationalizations. Subjective “political correctness” as the de facto moral compass of millions of people in the world is as unreliable and dangerous today as it was in the 1930’s in Nazi Germany.[5]
2. How to Apply Biblical Law Principles to Modern Society?
Jonathan describes his experience working with the Jubilee Policy Group and the Relational Justice project, which have sought to improve society in a secular state by applying biblical values and law to public life. Indeed, the influence of sensible biblical principles, such as redemptive punishment for crime and debt relief, can and does assist modern social leaders in finding solutions to widespread and difficult problems.
Jonathan also refers to “the Keep Sunday Special campaign which far-sightedly battled for a weekly day of rest in order to support hard-pressed families, provide employee protection, and place limits on what could be demanded from the environment.” The aims of this initiative sound noble and well-meaning, but James Bejon asks: “Why not a Keep Saturday Special campaign, or at the very least a Keep Saturday Night Through to Sunday Afternoon Special campaign?” Good question. There is a difference between (1) showing that wisdom from biblical laws can be adapted to needs of modern social circumstances in practical ways that benefit everyone (e.g., redemptive punishment for crime and debt relief) and (2) making legislation that privileges the religious beliefs of a certain group, even if that group is in the majority (e.g., Sunday laws) and even if such legislation has certain practical benefits. The largest and quite rapidly increasing number of people in the world today who observe the biblical seventh-day (Saturday) Sabbath[6] are Christians. Sunday laws could be unfair to them, as well as to many of other faiths, such as Jews and Muslims. Indeed, people need a weekly day of rest and the environment needs protection. But they also need freedom to choose their day of rest if this is a matter of conscience for them.
Jonathan states: “We are heavenly colonists and our job is to bring the life and rule of heaven to bear on earth. We are to do our best to order our civic life so that it matches the way things are done in heaven – ‘on earth as it is in heaven,’ as Jesus Himself taught.” However, we should also remember that the Christian church, God’s heavenly community on earth, is a church that relies on the power of influence to affect choices of those in outside society, rather than seeking to deploy coercion through state power. In a footnote (n. 17), Jonathan raises the question “in the light of the long history of Christendom – as to whether there should be a separation between Church and State.” In the light of such history and the New Testament, the answer to this question is an unequivocal “yes”—such separation is essential. The church is a theocracy, but the Bible describes the only true civil state theocracy in history: ancient Israel. Subsequent constructions of church-state pseudotheocracies, including in Christendom, have tended to yield gruesome results.
Indeed, Christians need to vigorously push back against neo-paganism that is sweeping through and saturating our modern society and leavening our church communities with destructive moral relativism. But we should do this in the New Testament Christian way exemplified by Jesus: through persuasion (including by example), rather than through force of legislation by the state.[7] We can work to convince non-Christians and nominal but secular “Christians” to apply biblical law principles, in ways that are adapted to modern life, because they work better than other principles in preserving individual and corporate well-being. Hopefully, such people will be drawn to our wise biblical God as a result (Deut 4:5-8). But if we try to impose what they perceive as religious rules based only on the authority of our God and his Word, which they do not really accept, we will be violating their religious freedom and giving them cause to resist.
This discussion raises a crucial question: Among the biblical laws, where is the line between (1) religious laws that Christians should keep to the extent that their principles remain applicable (not including Israelite ritual laws connected to the sanctuary on earth) and (2) ethical laws exemplifying values of general morality (e.g., respect for life and property) that are applicable to members of any well-functioning society, regardless of their religion? According to the biblical narrative framework, all the biblical laws were given by the one Creator-God, so in that sense, they all belong to his religion and observing them is a moral requirement for his followers. However, in a secular state where multiple faith or non-faith traditions are represented, it is the general ethical values reflected in biblical law that appropriately can be urged upon the society. Nevertheless, conflict can develop when Christians and others do not agree concerning the boundaries between general ethical principles and religious requirements for which individuals should be accountable only to God and in some cases to their churches.
Such conflict is currently manifested especially regarding sexuality and reproduction. It is clear that legislation should prohibit rape and incest, but what about abortion? Is the principle that life begins at conception merely a religious belief or is it a fact of life that general ethics should consider? Should legislation oppose homosexual activity, which is consistently condemned in the Bible, or should the state regard any problem with it as a religious matter and therefore ignore it (along with adultery) or support it by establishing homosexual “marriage”? If homosexual “marriage” is permitted, is it inconsistent to prohibit polygamy between consenting adults? It is one thing to acknowledge (as I do) that Christians should not engage in adultery, homosexual activity, or polygamy. But should we attempt to influence legislation on such matters, or should we confine our efforts to persuading others that sexually pure fulfillment within marriage is the only path to real and lasting happiness in this area of life?
Roy Gane is Professor of Hebrew Bible and ANE Languages, Andrews University.
[1] I have also appreciated insights in Jonathan Burnside’s book, God, Justice, and Society, which I have cited in some of my own publications on biblical law.
[2] Isaac Kikawada (University of California, Berkeley) presidential address at the 1986 Pacific Coast regional meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature at Santa Clara University in California.
[3] See also much of Roy E. Gane, Old Testament Law for Christians: Original Context and Enduring Application (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2017).
[4] See, for example, Roy E. Gane, “Social Justice,” in The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Law, ed. Pamela Barmash (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019), 19-34.
[5] Laura Schlessinger and Stewart Vogel, The Ten Commandments: The Significance of God’s Laws in Everyday Life (New York: Cliff Street Books, 1998), xxix.
[6] Jesus, the “lord of the Sabbath” (Matt 12:8; cf. Mark 2:28), affirmed the Sabbath of Creation (Mark 2:27) and the Decalogue by his example (Luke 4:16), reformed it at the risk of his life (Matt 12:9-14; John 5:2-18), and indicated that it would be in effect for his followers when people in Judea would need to flee at a later time (Matt 24:20), which was after his resurrection.
[7] See Gane, Old Testament Law for Christians, 163-68 for critique of the extreme approach of Christian Reconstructionists/Theonomists, who believe that modern nations should enforce adaptations of biblical civil laws, with their penalties.
-->