The eighth commandment in Mosaic Law is to not destroy objects associated with His name.
Where in scripture?
Deuteronomy 12:4
That is not how you are to worship the LORD, your God.
Discussion:
This is the most interesting commandment that I’ve analyzed thus far. It raises two key issues that are not cut and dried. The first is the nature of the law itself. The second is its applicability toward Christians. I will therefore split up this analysis into two posts, and probably add a third post at a later date.
The scriptural origin of the eighth commandment of the Mitzvot, as stated by Jewish resources, is Deuteronomy 12:4. In order to make sense of it, the verse needs to be read in context.
Deuteronomy 12:2-4 (New American Bible)
2 Destroy without fail every place on the high mountains, on the hills, and under every leafy tree where the nations you are to dispossess worship their gods.
3 Tear down their altars, smash their sacred pillars, destroy by fire their sacred poles, and shatter the idols of their gods, that you may stamp out the remembrance of them in any such place.
4 That is not how you are to worship the LORD, your God. 12:2-4
A plain reading of the passage suggests that the LORD is commanding the Israelites to tear down the places of worship of Canaanites. A plain reading suggests the LORD does not which to be worshipped in the same manner as the Canaanite gods– with sacred pillars and poles. Deuteronomy 12:4 of the NAB translation does not say to not destroy objects associated with His name. The Bible passage seemingly differs from the Mosaic Law.
According to the Douay Rheims translation, Deuteronomy 12:4 says: “You shall not do so to the Lord your God.” That is closer to the Mitzvot, but not quite the same. Other English translations are as follows:
· King James: Ye shall not do so unto the LORD your God.
· New International Version: You must not worship the LORD your God in their way.
· New American Standard: You shall not act like this toward the LORD your God.
Jewish sources don’t seem to translate the verse differently. This site uses the King James translation: Ye shall not do so unto the LORD your God.
It seems that the short verse of scripture in Deuteronomy is not self-interpreting. For thousands of years, Jews have relied on Tradition as the authority as to how this how this commandment should be interpreted. Non-biblical literature and the Oral Law are of great prominence in Judaism and Jewish interpretation of Deuteronomy 12:4 is fairly consistent - to not destroy objects associated with His name.
Though Jewish Tradition is consistent, Christian sources are all over the board on their interpretations of the verse.
John Wesley's Explanatory Notes say that the verse means to “not worship Him in several places, mountains, and groves.”
The Matthew Henry Commentary relies upon the plain reading of the verse and says, “The Israelites are charged not to bring the rites and usages of idolaters into the worship of God; not under color of making it better. We cannot serve God and mammon; nor worship the true God and idols; nor depend upon Christ Jesus and upon superstitious or self-righteous confidences.”
This site says it means, “In their desire to be more accepted they adopted some or all of the practices of their neighbors. They did not listen to the law or the prophets.”
This site says, “This verse provides a foundation for how to observe what can be confusing ways of worship to our modern times. Worship is absolutely something done in God’s way not the way of the world around us, and it clearly involves sacrifice.”
This site rather vaguely states, “What does Deuteronomy 12:4 teach us about worshipping God? Answer: There is a right way and there are many wrong ways. Read the context to understand this a bit more.”
This site says, “We have been showing the Jews that the Messiah changed God’s appointed Feasts to Easter and Christmas (This is a false teaching that Yeshua (Jesus) NEVER instituted and would have been a sin if He did. We cannot find these man-made holidays anywhere in Scripture. Matter of fact, God even tells us that we are NOT to take another god’s celebration and make it His.”
This site, in a rambling discourse, asserts that the Catholic Church is the “Whore of Christmas,” and lists the verse among many as claimed support for its contention.
This site poses the question: “The ‘Vestal Virgins’ of pagan Rome and the ‘Nuns’ of Catholic Rome - What is the Connection?” It tries to make the connection and uses the verse as support.
This site says the verse means, “We must resist attempts by atheists and Jewish traitors who hate their own religion and seek to uproot it. In the USA attempts to remove the Ten Commandments etc from court houses should be resisted. We need to protect all aspects of our Hebraic heritage that our ancestors consciously or subconsciously managed to incorporate into our civil affairs.”
This poster says, “The Roman church is not considered Christian in my opinion because they do not follow the Christ or obey His Father in their worship. …The ancient Romans were pagans (many still are in their worship) and worshiped their gods/goddesses with their own worship system that unfortunately they kept when they infiltrated the Church started by the Christ and guided by His Apostles. [Deuteronomy 12:4 tells the followers of the LORD to never worship Him the way the pagans worship their gods/goddesses]
The many different interpretations of Deuteronomy 12:4 seem to demonstrate how different people can read the same thing in scripture and believe that it means different things.
Nowadays, many people feel that they have license to interpret scripture in any manner that they see fit. For the first 1,500 years of Christianity, however, no one suggested that this was a wise practice. However, in the early1500s, Martin Luther introduced the concept of Sola Scriptura.
The term Sola Sciptura means "by scripture alone." The concept suggests that the Bible contains all knowledge that is necessary for salvation and holiness.
I want to emphasize that the older mainline Protestant denominations do not deny the value of Tradition. They only posit that all other authorities are subordinate to, and are to be corrected by, scripture. At the same time, however, the doctrine also states that scripture is “governed by the discernible excellence of the text as well as the personal witness of the Holy Spirit to the heart of each man.”
Sola Scriptura asserts that every man is able to interpret scripture on his own, as he is guided by the Holy Spirit. This sounds “good,” as it is consistent with our American ideals – no one should be subordinate to anyone else and we should be free to do or believe whatever we desire.
However, the various interpretations of Deuteronomy 12:4 suggest a problem with Sola Scriptura.
Before Christianity ever existed there was a single meaning of Deuteronomy 12:4. It remained in place for thousands of years. It is the definitive explanation - not destroy objects associated with His name. It cannot be disputed. Other explanations are in error.
Trying to interpret scripture without researching the 2,000 years of Christian writings and wisdom is like trying to write a term paper without doing any research. It is just asking for erroneous conclusions.
Though the concept of sola scriptura seems intuitive at first blush, it unravels when one understands that sola scriptura is contrary to scripture itself.
Scripture regarding Sola Scriptura (every man interpreting scripture on his own with the help of the Holy Spirit)
2 Peter 3:15-16
And consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, also wrote to you, speaking of these things as he does in all his letters. In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures.
Acts 8:30–31
Philip ran up and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and said, "Do you understand what you are reading?" He replied, "How can I, unless someone instructs me?" So he invited Philip to get in and sit with him.
Early Church Fathers on the Concept of Sola Scriptura
The concept of Sola Scriptura was foreign to the first Christian. The early Christians relied exclusively on Oral Tradition since there were no New Testament scriptures that had even been written for the first generation of Christians. There wasn’t even a New Testament as we know it until the list of Scripture was compiled by the Church only at Hippo in 393 and Carthage in 397, and then it was sent to Rome for confirmation in 419.
The early church fathers emphatically rejected Sola Scriptura.
Irenaeus Iv. 26,5
Where then the gifts of God have been set, there we must learn the truth from them with whom is the succession from the apostles. . . . For these guard our faith, . . . and they expound the scriptures to us without peril."
Tertullian De Praescrip. 19
They who affirm that the truth is with them must say that the corruptions in the scriptures and the falsities in the expositions of them have been rather introduced by us. To the scriptures, therefore, we must not appeal. . . . For the order of things would require that this question should be first proposed: ‘To whom belongeth the very faith; whose are the scriptures; by whom, and through whom, and when, and to whom was that rule delivered whereby men became Christians?’ For wherever both the true Christian rule and faith shall be shown to be, there will be the true scriptures and the true expositions and all the true Christian traditions
Vincent of Lerins Commonitor2
Here, perhaps, some will inquire: ‘Since the canon of the scriptures is perfect and more than suffices to itself for all things, what need is there to join with it the authority of the Church’s mind?’ And he answers: ‘Because on account of its depth, all do not take the Scripture according to one and the same sense, but this man and that man interpret it severally in their own fashion.’ . . . Therefore, it is exceedingly necessary, because of such great deviations of so varying an error, that the line of prophetic and apostolic interpretation should be guided by the rule of ecclesiastical and Catholic sense.
...In the next post, I’ll provide the "conclusion" and discuss how Tradition, and not scripture, primarily determines the applicability of this Mosaic Law to Christians.
No comments:
Post a Comment