[keltic63]

so my pastor got back to me with some initial info on this idea of splitting the levitical laws into different sections. Here's some of what she had to say:

For what it's worth, I believe the most responsible Christian approach is to look to Jesus as the fulfillment or "best of" the Law. Every law we run across in the OT (or NT for that matter) should be run through the Jesus-Checker: What would he say? would he agree? disagree? would he follow this? tell us to do the same? expound, explain, except, excerpt?

Jesus respected the Law in word and deed, saying flat out that he'd not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it and saying that 'those who break the least of these commandments and encourage others to do the same shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven'.

Yet Jesus broke the law on several occasions - healing on the Sabbath, eating with unwashed hands, stopping at least one 'lawful' execution, and consorting with outcasts, sinners, Gentiles and women. He also summed up the Law and the Prophets by the twofold command, 'Love God, love your neighbor'.

Overall, His pattern seems to be - follow the Law, but when in doubt, err on the side of humanity.

so Jesus fulfills the law, in a sense, no longer requiring us to follow it to the letter, or expect a terrible judgment for failing to do so.

'Law' that fails to help people, or that further burdens them, is not Law as God intended it. Law is supposed to guide us into being the We that God put us here to be. It's not supposed to batter us into playing at what we're not, never were, and never will be. Neither God nor God's world is served that way.

And anyone who accuses us of playing grocery-store with the scriptures, yet wants to break down Leviticus into This and That, Yes and No and Maybe, is under the same accusation. We ALL read scripture selectively and interpret it through our own lens; some of us are just more honest about it.

Did I mention that I LOVE my pastor?????