Letter of the Law

[secondeve]

Something I've just noticed is that the differing interpretations some Christians have of various Biblical verses centre on making a distinction between the 'letter' of the law and the 'spirit' of the law. An example would be a recent thread in the Inner Court talking about Jesus's commands re divorce - that divorce for any reason other than infidelity is a sin - made in the context of a query about Mosaic law. And basically, I saw a lot of people get up and say that the reason Jesus spoke as he did, in response to the question posed, was largely cultural, in that there was a political message behind the statement, i.e. a criticism of King Herod, and that it was in this context that Jesus was speaking, rather than (or so it seemed to be inferred) to all potential divorcees. Because, as one might reasonably assume, stating that you can only divorce on grounds of adultery is, if read literally, an effectuve prohibition on divorcing for reasons of domestic violence.

Then I went back to the Outer Court and saw that a new poster had commented that they and their partner, who were planning to marry, were living and sleeping together. Unequivocally, the response was that they were living in sin and to repent. And that's what made me think: in this instance, they are applying the Biblical law to the letter, rather than to what might arguably be called the spirit - which is, that two people, once joined, should stay together. So I'm wondering, if in their case the intention really is to get married, might it be argued that, although they are currently unmarried, they are still living in the spirit of the law, which is ultimately the loving union of man and woman under God, even if they are not living to the letter? And so, comparably, couldn't we say that someone who divorced their first partner because of domestic violence and then remarried is not living according to the letter of the law, but to its spirit?

These are just two examples, and I'm sure there are many others we could all think of, given the time. But what I'm basically asking is, which is more important: the letter of the law, or the spirit of the law? Is one always more important than the other, or not? If so, why? How is it possible to always know whether the spirit or letter is more important in one instance than another? And, perhaps most importantly, is it possible that this can differ on an individual basis - by which I mean, is it possible that the spirit of a law should be applied for one person, but the letter to another?

[Oh Hamburgers!]

A very interesting observation, and I do agree it is a topic of much debate.

I have always believed in following the spirit of the law over the letter of the law, although the difficulty of that is sometimes figuring out what the 'spirit' of the law actually is. The letter of the law provides good guidelines, but there are many strange circumstances that are brought up each and every day, and they sometimes require a more in-depth look into their true intentions.

I'm sure I am of the minority here tho

[WayneB]

secondeve,

What you are reading are mostly opinions. The perfect Law of God is unchanging and its purpose is to point us to our need for a Savior. Our opinions regarding the Law don't really matter. Believers and unbelievers alike will debate until the great Refining Fire removes the dross and purifies our understanding of God's TRUTH. The problem is that too often we believers want to interpret the Law in context of the flesh rather than the Holy Spirit.

Regarding marriage, I believe we first have to understand the Jewish marriage customs in order to understand marriage between a man and woman. It isn't about living together or sleeping together or consumating a relationship...or even a ceremony. It is all about growing together as ONE. It should be taken seriously and one step at a time beginning with a betrothal (promise) and ending with a public expression of a life-long commitment to one another...after proper preparations are finished.

If more people, believers and unbelievers alike, followed the true Biblical example of marriage, the divorce rate would be drastically reduced.

That's my opinion. ...from a man who has been married for 28 years.

In Christ,

wayne

[systemstrike_7]

I think you will find different answers in different situations. In some instances, believers will take the stance for the law of the letter, while in another instance they will stand up for the spirit of the law. It all depends upon which angle better pushes their theological or personal agenda at the time.

[Guest shiloh357]

I think you will find different answers in different situations. In some instances, believers will take the stance for the law of the letter, while in another instance they will stand up for the spirit of the law. It all depends upon which angle better pushes their theological or personal agenda at the time.

Not really. It ususally revolves around common sense, and simply knowing how to handle the Bible.

Every passage in the Bible has an "address." Just like the front of an envelope that lists the sender and the intended recipient, you have the same thing in the Bible. Everything in the Bible is not meant for every person in every age. While the entire Bible is relevant where spiritual insight is concerned. Not every commandment applies to every person, and this was true, even in Bible days.

Take the OT law for example. Some of the commandments only applied to you if you were a priest; some only applied to you if you are a man; some only applied to you if you were a woman; some only applied if you had children. Some applied only to farmers, and others only applied to you if you were poor. Even in the Bible days, you were only responsible for those commandments that spoke to your particular situation in life. It is not like EVERYONE had to keep 613 commandments everyday.

It is no different today. Not every commandment in the New Testament applies to every person. Some only apply to those who own businesses; some ony apply to those in the ministry, and so forth.

There are laws that were set up to apply to the nation of Israel and only then when Israel was a theocracy. Some of the commandments cannot be kept at all because Israel no longer has a Temple.

There is a lot more to it than you really understand.

People will use the "spirit" of the law to mask their disobedience in parts that do apply to them, unfortunately. I have found the "spirit of the law" to be a very misused and abused concept.

[systemstrike_7]

Shiloh, I was never implying that it was "ok" to abuse the spirit of the letter, merely that it happens. You did not deny this, and my statement will stand.

"The Bible is like a drug store. It's contents remain the same, but the medical practise changes." -Mark Twain-

[Guest shiloh357]

Shiloh, I was never implying that it was "ok" to abuse the spirit of the letter, merely that it happens. You did not deny this, and my statement will stand.

"The Bible is like a drug store. It's contents remain the same, but the medical practise changes." -Mark Twain-

No, your statement does not stand. The fact is that I demonstrated that your blanket assumption is factually incorrect. With all due respect to Mark Twain, he is wrong.

[systemstrike_7]

Shiloh, I was never implying that it was "ok" to abuse the spirit of the letter, merely that it happens. You did not deny this, and my statement will stand.

"The Bible is like a drug store. It's contents remain the same, but the medical practise changes." -Mark Twain-

No, your statement does not stand. The fact is that I demonstrated that your blanket assumption is factually incorrect. With all due respect to Mark Twain, he is wrong.

shiloh357:

People will use the "spirit" of the law to mask their disobedience in parts that do apply to them, unfortunately. I have found the "spirit of the law" to be a very misused and abused concept.

This is what I was saying. People interpreting the bible in their own way to further their agenda. It happens, and always will happen.

[systemstrike_7]

This is a strong philosophical argument.

Well then let us try to break it down in under a philosophical light.

The law of the letter is essentially theological certainties. Concrete doctrine that cannot be changed or interpreted differently, no matter what the circumstance. A good analogy would be gravity, it cannot be bent nor changed. Gravity is constant.

The spirit of the letter is something completely different. It allows for a subjective view into certain doctrines that can be bent or completely changed due to certain situations or issues.

A good analogy to this would be water. Someone could say that cold water is better than hot water, but in reality, it depends upon how the water is used. If the water is being used as a refreshing drink, cold would prove to be the better choice. But if the water is being used to take a bath in, hot would prove to be the better choice.

So, in light of the above statements, what is better? Law or spirit? Well, this can hardly be answered because the question in itself is subjective. In certain cases, a believer would say that the law is the way to go with a certain passage such as Jesus declaring that he is the only way to the father. In another case, they will say that you must use the spirit, and interpret the passage according to different circumstances. For instance, when the question of whether or not God sends people to hell who never had the chance to hear Jesus' name.

There, thats the best I can do. Maybe someone can do a bit better.

[Guest shiloh357]

Keeping the spirit of the law means that the intended purpose of a particular commandment is achieved when one is incapable of fulfilling the letter.

For example, you are sitting at a stoplight at an intersection. The law says you must remain stopped until the light is green for you to go. Now, you are the only one at the light; there no other cars and no police. You could violate the law and pass on through without hurting anyone, but the law says you must stay until the light is green. Simple enough.

Let's say, however that you look into your rear view mirror and see a huge truck like a dump truck barrelling straight for you, at a high rate of speed. The driver is laying on his horn and it is clear from the erratic movement of the truck and the horn, that he is about to lose control and for some reason can't stop. You have only seconds to decide what to do. Do you stay at the light? The letter of the law says you must stay, but if you obey the letter, there is a good chance you will be killed.

So, you quickly decide to move your car through the intersection and out of the way of the out of control truck. The purpose of traffic lights is the safety of the driver. However, in this case the letter of the law meant death, not safety. In this case the letter could save you. Even though you violated the letter, you still observed the spirit of the law, by moving your vehicle a safe distance from the other vehicle.

In the example of the people who were living together, it doesn't really matter that they intended to get married. They were still living in sin, and in doing so, they were already violating the both the spirit and the letter of the law where God's moral law is concerned. The whole, "Oh, we plan getting married anyway" thing, is just a means of justification of sin. There was no "spirit" of the law involved. That kind of logic does not play out in any other context. Can I just take something from the the store and use it for three days on the grounds that I am going to buy it later? No, you will rightly prosecuted for shoplifting if you leave the store with it for even a second.