Old Testament Law: A Redemptive
Movement
In the previous posts, I noted two key points in relation to Old Testament law.
First, the laws cannot be understood apart from their context and purpose.
Second, many of the laws that seem
unusually restrictive served an
important purpose: God wanted a people
who understood what it meant for
something to be “holy” – separate,
undefiled, and distinct. God used laws
governing seemingly insignificant things to
help the Israelites understand what it
meant for them to be distinct from the
cultures around them.
Even with these caveats, it’s hard to read the Law without cringing at more
morally significant mandates, such as those concerning slavery or the treatment
of women.
It is important to note that while the Israelite Law was a solid move toward a
better world, the laws were usually incremental instead of complete. The
laws were intended to show a redemptive movement in the broader context of the
world. In Christian terms, this means God at times used progressive revelation to
reveal truth. The cultural climate of world was at a particular place; God used the
Law to begin a redemptive movement away from injustice and toward justice. It
was a cultural shift that can only be appreciated by understanding what God was
pulling people from and what he was pulling them toward. The Old Testament
shows the beginning of a restorative work in a very broken world through a
particular group of people. This was the start of that process, not the
finished product.
We see this principle clearly in the New Testament. Let’s start with the broad
principles of justice and mercy. Jesus himself taught:
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’”
He was referring to an Old Testament priniciple of lex talionis (Exodus
21:22-25). Jesus continued:
“But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right
cheek, turn to them the other cheek also” (Matthew 5:38-39).
The Old Testament standard limited revenge (a good and unusual move for that
time period), but the New Testament showed an ideal where mercy and
forgiveness side-by-side with justice.
In spite of the misogynist label given to Old Testament law, the status of women
also revealed a redemptive movement. According to the Mosaic law, a wife had a
right not to endure physical abuse; she had the right to inheritance, as well as the
right to initiate divorce and be protected from a husband’s frivolous divorce. The
Law commanded improved treatment of suspected adulteresses, improved rape
laws, and a more equitable household environment. In other words, a woman in
Israel was not a powerless possession living at the social and economic mercy of
the men around her. Once again, these laws were not the apex of God’s plan.
They were part of a redemptive movement away from the cultural norms in the
cultures of that time.
Here’s one example of how a redemptive movement for women finds its fruition in
the New Testament. In Deuteronomy 24, divorce is permitted; Matthew 19
clearly states that divorce is not God’s ideal – the certificate of divorce was to
protect the wife because of the hardness of her husband’s heart. We read later in
the New Testament, “Husbands, love your wife, as Christ loved the Church.” This
kind of love is an agape love, selfless and sacrificial. That’s the goal.
The Mosaic law makes it clear that offenses against slaves were offenses against
people with value, in sharp contrast will all other cultures at that time. In Exodus
21, the Israelites were to take “life for life” if a master killed a slave. If a slave
was beaten and lost an eye or a tooth, he or she was set free. Hammurabi called
for the death penalty to those helping runaway slaves. Israel, however, was to
offer safe harbor to foreign runaway slaves (Deuteronomy 23:15-16) and grant
release in the seventh year to indentured servants according to Deuteronomy 15. .
Slaves were given leisure days. Masters had to release slaves from service with
generous provisions, all conducted with the right attitude for the slave’s wellbeing as he enters into freedom:
“Beware that there is no base thought in your heart . . . and your eye is hostile
toward your poor brother” (Deuteronomy 15:9).
We read in the book of Job:
“If I have denied justice to my slaves (menservants and maidservants) when
they had a grievance against me, what will I do when God confronts me? What
will I answer when called to account? Did not he who made me in the womb
make them? Did not the same one form us both within our mothers?” (Job
31:13-15).
William Webb writes of the redemptive movement in the Old Testament, noting
how the Old Testament law improved the status of slaves in contrast to the norm
as seen in the historical records of other cultures at that time. Regarding slavery,
Christopher Wright declares:
“The slave [in Israel] was given human and legal rights unheard of in
contemporary societies. Mosaic legislation offered a radical advance for
Ancient Near East cultures. According to the Anchor Bible Dictionary, ‘We have
in the Bible the first appeals in world literature to treat slaves as human beings
for their own sake and not just in the interests of their masters.’”
One cannot understand the New Testament passages on slavery without
understanding context and purpose. There is a noteworthy difference between
slavery and indentured servitude in the ANE and Roman world. We have an image
of slavery drawn from our recent American history. This is not an accurate
reflection of how both slaves and servants lived at other times.
In the NT, slaves are encouraged to pursue freedom (1 Corinthians 7:21). Two
verses later, Paul clarifies what type of slavery he is talking about when he gives
the free people in the church the following caution: “do not become slaves of
men.” Paul is not saying, “Avoid capture.” He’s saying, “Avoid putting yourself
into such a financial bind that you must become a servant to pay off your
debts.” This is a passage about indentured servitude.
Paul takes a lot of undeserved heat for returning Onesimus to Philemon, but let’s
add some context to that situation. Paul had been an exemplary Jew: he knew the
Mosaic Law said not to return a slave to his master. Onesimus was likely a
runaway indentured servant, fleeing before his debt was paid. Paul befriends him
when Onesimus ended up in prison, and after hearing his story urged Onesimus –
whom Paul claimed as a “son” – to return to Philemon. Paul sent along a letter
urging Philemon to free him of the rest of his obligation because Onesimus was a
brother in Christ (Philemon 1:16; Galatians 3:28).
The infamous 1 Corinthians 7 and Colossians 3 passages are often blamed for
encouraging a slave mentality. On the contrary, they contain advice to
slaves/indentured servants about how to live with integrity in the midst of
hardship. It’s hardly an “atta boy!” for their lot in life. Considering how Romans
dealt with civil disobedience, and considering the “present crisis” mentioned in 1
Corinthians 7:26 (likely a famine that had left many people in dire financial
straits), the advice to persevere with patience may have simply been a practical
reality for that time.
So what redemptive movement did the Old Testament laws begin? IN the ANE,
slaves were owned as mere possessions; the Mosaic law began to recognize them
as people with moral significance deserving of rights; the New Testament
declared that we are all brothers in sisters in Christ.
_______________________________________________________________
God appears to have actively involved the Israelites in a movement that began an
individual and societal restoration. When Jesus arrived, he explained what the
fulfillment of the Law actually looked like, which is one reason Christian ethical
systems build primarily from the person and teaching of Christ and the New
Testament, not the 613 laws in the Old Testament. The Old Testament is not to
be discarded, but its usefulness cannot be understood without seeing the broader
context and purpose of the entire Biblical revelation.
Up next: What if the punishments in the Old Testament don’t fit the
crime?