A Moment of Clarity

I have been talking about the templates we use to interpret the world around us. One of the templates I use is that one can use the Old Testament. While most Christians say they use it, in reality most do not. I remember the exact moment that I understood the continued validity of the Old Testament, it was

A Moment of Clarity

I remember it well. It was back in my cowboy days, and I was at my ranch in the evening reading. The carpet was green shag and the couch had earth tones. I was reading a former Seventh Day Adventist, Robert Brimsmead, who had left that denomination. His main argument against the Sabbath keeping of his former denomination was an argument against the Old Testament. Basically he was saying that the Old Testament (OT) was superseded by the New Testament (NT). He made several arguments that no doubt were convincing to some, as later he was the poster boy for the New and Improved Worldwide Church of God which also abandoned the Sabbath. In the book I was reading, Brimsmead was ranting about the Old Testament not being relevant and so on when I had my moment of clarity. I think I even said it out loud.

"Doesn't he realize that if he is right about the Old Testament, the New Testament falls by these same arguments?"

Obviously he did not.  What do I mean by this? The NT cannot stand alone because it is so infused with the Hebrew Scriptures that the two cannot be separated. If the OT is obsolete (the exact reasoning does not matter, and there are many versions), then how can another document based on it be inspired? If God's inspired word for 1400 BC is not inspired, then clearly God's inspired word for 50 AD is not inspired either.

For example, the NT in 2 Tim 3 says the Old Testament is inspired. The Message version puts it this way:

Unscrupulous con men will continue to exploit the faith. They're as deceived as the people they lead astray. As long as they are out there, things can only get worse. But don't let it faze you. Stick with what you learned and believed, sure of the integrity of your teachers—why, you took in the sacred Scriptures with your mother's milk! There's nothing like the written Word of God for showing you the way to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. Every part of Scripture is God-breathed and useful one way or another—showing us truth, exposing our rebellion, correcting our mistakes, training us to live God's way. Through the Word we are put together and shaped up for the tasks God has for us.

The Scriptures referenced here are the Old Testament.  How can we claim inspiration for the NT, but reject the OT, when the NT disagrees with us? To make it even more telling this scripture tells us that we can use the Old Testament in a way that some modern theologians say we cannot--that it can be used to train and lead us. Who do we believe?

Of course the usual dodge is to claim "inspiration" for the Hebrew Scriptures but decide (in contrast to the scripture) that it is no longer useful. The advocates of this approach will often deny that this is what they are doing, but to be blunt they are lying to themselves. It is as if they are turning the words of Jesus in Mat 5 on their head, making Him say:

17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to abolish them.

My favorite professor in graduate school actually said this, and he smiled broadly when he said it. He was joking, but this is the exact approach many take. What Jesus said was that he came to fulfill them, not destroy them.

What happened to Brimsmead? Well, he realized his dilemma later in life, and understood that he either had to accept the Old or reject the New. He chose badly. Last I heard he was operating a New Age book store and growing avocados in New Zealand-a non-Christian by any reasonable metric.

Yet, this does not trouble Christians who still regard Brimsmead as a mentor. Brimsmead's material is still used as a source in some circles. This approach is a common malady among many people. They decide to adopt an idea or a doctrine, and they began to parrot the arguments of others in order to come to the preordained, desired conclusion. They do not stop to consider that they do not agree with the premises that the people making the argument may have. The only thing that makes is self-justification, not good theology. Ideas have consequences.

Comments

[Eddie H. Nessul]

I prefer to use the terms similar to Microsoft for the Good Book... like "BIBLE 1.0 and BIBLE 2.0" rather than the terms "OLD TESTAMENT" and "NEW TESTAMENT".

Old Testament implies an expiration date, like you find on the milk carton.

Perhaps even OLDER TESTAMENT would be a better term.

Eddie H. Nessul
Amboy, California

(Read Names Backwards!)