Hi George,
I do agree that some of the OT laws are perhaps ceremonial, but I'm sure it
doesn't take a PhD to figure out that some just make good sense. The idea of
Christ is salvation. Not lawlessness. While the punishment for sin has
changed, assuming we believe in Christ, that does not mean that we should go
out and commit sins. I'm quite certain that Christ himself did not commit
sins, laid out in the OT. Bear in mind that some laws may have been
necessary for the people of that time, as you said, but some still apply.
How about murder, should we say that this is ok, because God forgives? Let's
not make the same mistakes that many have, with regard to science. It's been
said that people should stay within their own field of expertise. Well I
would say that genetic engineering is God's. Let's stay out. Studying and
learning how God created things is one thing. Playing with his creations is
another. But you don't have to believe me, we'll all find out when the
geneticists have thoroughly caused an epidemic by creating some new virus,
even by accident. Example: We try to create crops that resist bug
infestations. Should the plant create natural hybrids, as suggested by
another, this new plant and so on introduce this same genetic sequence.
Eventually the number of available crop for insect consumption is reduced
and insects populations begin to decline. What happens? Does anyone on this
listserv not know the importance of insects? While our narrow minds can see
the threat of killing off all the whales, but somehow we just cannot fathom
the consequences of playing with things we are not yet ready to handle. We
don't know what the weather will be a week from now, how can we say what
effect these tinkerings will have a hundred years from now?
Don P
-----Original Message-----
From: george murphy [mailto:gmurphy@raex.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 9:07 AM
To: Don Perrett
Cc: Robert Schneider; Asa@Calvin. Edu
Subject: End of the Law (Was Re: cosmology & polygamy)
Combining a couple of posts -
Don Perrett wrote:
> While I claim no divine understanding or interpretation, the passage in
> question is Deuteronomy 22:9 "Do not plant two kinds of seed in your
> vineyard; if you do, not only the crops you plant but also the fruit of
the
> vineyard will be defiled."
> In the various churches I have attending, it has been present as being the
> restriction of creating hybrid plants and fruits for consumption. You may
> say that this is not a correct interpretation. That is your right. I would
> say though that unless you have direct evidence to the contrary, it's
better
> to be safe than sorry. It amazes me how we can require the listing of
things
> such a MSG and other things on food, but have no law requiring the
labeling
> of hybrids and genetically manipulated food. While some may consider
> themselves to be as knowledgeable as God, and enjoy playing with something
> we are still trying to understand, I see no value for such things. Some
will
> say that with this technology we can make crops that hold up to weather
and
> insects. This may help the farmers produce higher yields, but at what
risk?
> Just look at what it did to the cattle in England. In no way am I saying
> that we should not continue research in genetics, but studying and trying
to
> manipulate are two different things. Would you let your child grab the
stove
> just to see what would happen? Why do we as a society allow such
techniques
> to be used in science? "Let's see what happens if we do this." This seems
to
> be the catch phrase. Let's first understand completely what we are doing
> before we truly mess up our entire ecology.
> Thanks for you patience.
There is something much more fundamental here than the
interpretation of
this particular regulation. Christians are not bound by the laws of the Old
Testament. "Christ is the end of the law" (Rom.10:4). "Now that faith has
come
we are no longer under a custodian" (Gal.3:25).
This does not mean that the Law is irrelevant. We still must live
in
society and be subject to its just laws for the sake of our neighbor, and
the OT
law may provide helpful guidance for the formulation of such civil law. And
since Christians continue sin, the Law still functions to point out &
admonish
that sin. But insofar as we do walk by faith in Christ, the Law is not our
basic ethical guide.
Again, the law may give us helpful insights. E.g., Lev.25 shows
that
care for the land, linked with justice among human beings, is an important
part
of God's intention for the world. But the particular way of caring for the
land
commanded there - simply letting it lie fallow every 7th year - is not one
we're
bound to follow. Agricultural science can teach us better methods, just as
medical science can give us better ways of treating skin diseases than those
set
out in Lev.14.
"Evangelical" means gospel-centered, not law-centered.
(BTW, the listing of MSG in foods is not really required. It can be
disguised under a lot of listings like "natural flavoring". My wife has
major
problems with this & has learned to be very wary.)
On a related topic, the WWJD slogan, Dave Siemens said:
>I am also aware that somebody was
>trying to come up with a catchy motto. But they produced confusion
>between what the Lord did and the principles he gave his followers to
>live by. These may be thoughtfully applied to our ethical puzzles, though
>it may not be simple. May I suggest a more accurate acronym, AACTT:
>Always Apply Christ's Teachings Today.
This is questionable because it seems to see Christ primarily as a
new
legislator. But Christ does not really give any new _teaching_ that isn't
already there (at least _in nuce_) in Moses & the prophets. When Christ is
appealed to as a guide for Christian life in the epistles it is especially
his
passion & death, not his teachings, which are pointed out. (E.g.,
Phil.2:4-11,
Heb.12:2-4, I Pet.2:18-25).
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
"The Science-Theology Dialogue"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 17 2002 - 11:41:12 EDT