Opinion of people who cite Old Testament Mosaic Law verses as "proof" Christians are hypocrites

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

One of those "proof someone isn't worth paying attention to" things since anyone who does so clearly has f[inks] all understanding of Christian theology. Not to mention it's laughably lazy. But it's still so stupid, here's basically an analogy to what such people are doing.

Person A: Anyone who produces or drinks alcohol in the United States is breaking the law. Alcohol is banned by the US Constitution.

Person B: That is currently not the case.

Person A: Um yes it is. *Cites 18th Amendment.* Haha checkmate!

Person B: And that was specifically repealed by the 21st Amendment and no longer has any binding legality. *Cites 21st Amendment*

Person A: Who cares? The Constitution still has a part clearly stating alcohol is banned. You're just coming up with excuses because you don't want to admit you're breaking the law.

[Blue3]

Well, there are also many Christians who do constantly cite Old Testament law, and quote Jesus in ways they take as evidence.

Also the ethical problem for why God would supposedly create such ridiculous laws to begin with.

[DaleCooper]

Horribly uninformed people.

[PSOL]

Didn’t Jesus say he was not here to replace the laws set forth in the Old Testament?

[Del Tachi]

Didn’t Jesus say he was not here to replace the laws set forth in the Old Testament?

Jesus says  He is the fulfillment of the law (Matt. 5:17.)  He introduced a New Covenant (Luke 22:20) that doesn't destroy the law, but completes it.  Hebrew sacrifices were not nullified by the death of Christ; they found their fulfillment in His death.   

[Blue3]

So what’s your opinion of Christian churches that say their focus is on the Old Testament?

Should all churches ignore all the moral commands and laws of the Old Testament, and just cite them as outdated historical footnotes?

(Putting aside how unethical and illogical having them in the first place is, or how bad that blood theory of atonement is compared to other interpretations of atonement)

[John Dule]

god's law is eternal and infallible except when he changes his mind

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Well, there are also many Christians who do constantly cite Old Testament law, and quote Jesus in ways they take as evidence.

Also the ethical problem for why God would supposedly create such ridiculous laws to begin with.

They're only ridiculous when looked at in a modern context. For example: the ban on eating on pork and shellfish is because at the time those were quite unsanitary and a common thread of food-borne illnesses because they couldn't be cooked properly unlike today. Planting more than one type of seed in fields is something that farmers don't do even today, it results in cross pollination and worse harvests in general. Wearing clothing made out of one type of fabric seems trivial today...but that's because we have sewing machines. At the time such clothes were more likely to get tattered and fall apart and were more difficult to wash and since fabric was a much more scarce resource at the time, so keeping clothing usable as long as possible was a much bigger deal than now. And keeping the Sabbath was in some ways the first "labor law", the notion was that everyone deserved at least one day off a week and no one was going to be forced to work all the time. Other examples too.

[Del Tachi]

So what’s your opinion of Christian churches that say their focus is on the Old Testament?

I'm not aware of any Christian churches that "focus" on the Old Testament. 

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Well, there are also many Christians who do constantly cite Old Testament law, and quote Jesus in ways they take as evidence.

Also the ethical problem for why God would supposedly create such ridiculous laws to begin with.

They're only ridiculous when looked at in a modern context. For example: the ban on eating on pork and shellfish is because at the time those were quite unsanitary and a common thread of food-borne illnesses because they couldn't be cooked properly unlike today. Planting more than one type of seed in fields is something that farmers don't do even today, it results in cross pollination and worse harvests in general. Wearing clothing made out of one type of fabric seems trivial today...but that's because we have sewing machines. At the time such clothes were more likely to get tattered and fall apart and were more difficult to wash and since fabric was a much more scarce resource at the time, so keeping clothing usable as long as possible was a much bigger deal than now. And keeping the Sabbath was in some ways the first "labor law", the notion was that everyone deserved at least one day off a week and no one was going to be forced to work all the time. Other examples too.

No, a lot of them really were just ways of enforcing a sacred-profane distinction for its own sake. Read Purity and Danger. Good point regarding the Sabbath, though.

Not that that makes the kind of Whiggish castigation of the Sinaitic covenant that a lot of people do any less stupid or, frankly, dangerous. Literal Nazi theologians loved this framing, given what religion it is that still explicitly and by definition takes the Sinaitic covenant seriously.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

So what’s your opinion of Christian churches that say their focus is on the Old Testament?

I'm not aware of any Christian churches that "focus" on the Old Testament. 

Messianic Jews if you consider them Christian, but they're already pretty controversial. Aside from them the closest would be probably Ethiopian Orthodox.

[Associate Justice PiT]

So what’s your opinion of Christian churches that say their focus is on the Old Testament?

I'm not aware of any Christian churches that "focus" on the Old Testament. 

Messianic Jews if you consider them Christian, but they're already pretty controversial. Aside from them the closest would be probably Ethiopian Orthodox.

     After those, I would say the next closest is probably someone like Steven Anderson who says we need to maintain the judicial components of the Law, e.g. executing people for bestiality. The idea that the ceremonial aspects of the Law were fulfilled by Christ is uncontroversial among Christians, for He is the true and eternal high priest, "a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek." The sacrifice of animals was merely a sign pointing to the sacrifice of the Son of God.

[PSOL]

Didn’t Jesus say he was not here to replace the laws set forth in the Old Testament?

Jesus says  He is the fulfillment of the law (Matt. 5:17.)  He introduced a New Covenant (Luke 22:20) that doesn't destroy the law, but completes it.  Hebrew sacrifices were not nullified by the death of Christ; they found their fulfillment in His death.   

So outside of any contradictions now abridged by the New Covenant, the past laws and ethics still stand?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Didn’t Jesus say he was not here to replace the laws set forth in the Old Testament?

Jesus says  He is the fulfillment of the law (Matt. 5:17.)  He introduced a New Covenant (Luke 22:20) that doesn't destroy the law, but completes it.  Hebrew sacrifices were not nullified by the death of Christ; they found their fulfillment in His death.   

So outside of any contradictions now abridged by the New Covenant, the past laws and ethics still stand?

If the sense of "obeying God" counts as an ethic or whatever.

Most relevant passages:

9 The next day as Cornelius’s messengers were nearing the town, Peter went up on the flat roof to pray. It was about noon, 10 and he was hungry. But while a meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw the sky open, and something like a large sheet was let down by its four corners. 12 In the sheet were all sorts of animals, reptiles, and birds. 13 Then a voice said to him, “Get up, Peter; kill and eat them.”

14 “No, Lord,” Peter declared. “I have never eaten anything that our Jewish laws have declared impure and unclean.[a]”

15 But the voice spoke again: “Do not call something unclean if God has made it clean.”

7 If the first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no need for a second covenant to replace it. 8 But when God found fault with the people, he said:

“The day is coming, says the Lord,
    when I will make a new covenant
    with the people of Israel and Judah.
9 This covenant will not be like the one
    I made with their ancestors
when I took them by the hand
    and led them out of the land of Egypt.
They did not remain faithful to my covenant,
    so I turned my back on them, says the Lord.
10 But this is the new covenant I will make
    with the people of Israel on that day,[c] says the Lord:
I will put my laws in their minds,
    and I will write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
    and they will be my people.
11 And they will not need to teach their neighbors,
    nor will they need to teach their relatives,[d]
    saying, ‘You should know the Lord.’
For everyone, from the least to the greatest,
    will know me already.
12 And I will forgive their wickedness,
    and I will never again remember their sins.”[e]

13 When God speaks of a “new” covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will soon disappear.

And for additional context:

Before the coming of this faith,[j] we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

26 So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

The 28th verse of this passage is the most famous, but the "law" being referred to here is the Old Testament law. This along with the context of the other verses is essentially saying that law is now fully obsolete and repealed and the new covenant is for all people, Jews and Gentiles, and that that previous distinction no longer matters. (This is because in the early church where most of the members were converts from Judaism, a lot of them held that being a Christian was still something only "for" Jews, that it was the fulfillment of the Jewish covenant but still didn't apply to outsiders. Paul swatted that down and stated the new Covenant applied to ALL people and the Jew/Gentile distinction was now fully obsolete and the Christians were not from a Jewish background were just as valid.)

[100% pro-life no matter what]

God sent His Son as part of a new Covenant.  There's nothing inherently wrong with trying to follow the OT law (Messianic Jews do to this day), but Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law, and Paul's letters clearly state that certain rituals, dietary rules, and the like, are no longer necessary.

[DaleCooper]

God sent His Son as part of a new Covenant.  There's nothing inherently wrong with trying to follow the OT law (Messianic Jews do to this day), but Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law, and Paul's letters clearly state that certain rituals, dietary rules, and the like, are no longer necessary.

There are also passages, like in Hebrews and Galatians, where the author appears to condemn post-resurrection attempts to adhere to the Mosaic Law. I don't subscribe to the interpretation that law-keepers are rejected by Christ like some fundamentalists do, but it's always seemed pretty clear to me that Christians are not expected or supposed to observe the Mosaic Law. Especially not since Christ himself actually says that the Law of Moses was mistaken when he condemns the death penalty in John and the laws regarding divorce in other gospels.

[The Mikado]

So what’s your opinion of Christian churches that say their focus is on the Old Testament?

I'm not aware of any Christian churches that "focus" on the Old Testament. 

The Seventh Day Adventists are the main one. Their belief in Biblical dietary laws, for example, drives many of them to just go vegetarian to simplify all the complex Kosher rules. Or keeping the Sabbath on Saturday rather than Sunday, similar to Jewish practices, etc.

[RINO Tom]

I once heard a Biblical historian describe the Old Testament as a "guideline" for Jews living in that world, tailored for that world.  It is not some God-approved rulebook.

[Vice President Christian Man]

These people should learn about Jesus and his purpose and then reevaluate their original argument. There's a common misconception that the OT is irrelevant because of Christ. This is false, although Mosaic Law (and this does not include the 10 commandments) is now irrelevant as we're under a new covenant.

[nicholas.slaydon]

So what’s your opinion of Christian churches that say their focus is on the Old Testament?

I'm not aware of any Christian churches that "focus" on the Old Testament. 

Messianic Jews if you consider them Christian, but they're already pretty controversial. Aside from them the closest would be probably Ethiopian Orthodox.

     After those, I would say the next closest is probably someone like Steven Anderson who says we need to maintain the judicial components of the Law, e.g. executing people for bestiality. The idea that the ceremonial aspects of the Law were fulfilled by Christ is uncontroversial among Christians, for He is the true and eternal high priest, "a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek." The sacrifice of animals was merely a sign pointing to the sacrifice of the Son of God.

There also exist Theonomists in the Calvinist tradition who hold that mankind should be governed by the laws of Moses, if not explicitly by the letter of that law than at least by its general equity. Though out of that same movement comes such people as Rousas Rushdoony and Doug Wilson, who promote postmillennial ideas that the kingdom of god must be formed on the earth by the church taking over the world and establishing the theocracy of the kingdom of god based on the laws of Moses as a precondition to Christ's return.