One issue arising when you tell someone you take the Bible seriously is they’ll bring up all the Old Testament Mosaic law and tell you you can’t eat ham or play football (since it’s pigskin), sine rules forbidding those activities are found in the Old Testament. Such an argument provides an example of the logical error of false choice.
- If you say you don’t follow Mosaic law and eat ham you’ll be accused of not following the Bible seriously as you claim.
- If you do follow it you’ll be accused of all sorts of strange things, and likely they’ll find something you don’t follow.
It’s a false choice — in other words those aren’t the only possibilities.
It’s not a new issue, as the early church dealt with it in Acts 15 and concluded Christians don’t have to follow the Mosaic law. Certainly principles in the Old Testament are found in the New Testament (forbidding adultery, etc), but as a Christian you don’t have to worry about obeying the Sabbath.
The confusion arises as some ideas like sexual immorality are repeated and binding on Christians, while others are Mosaic law only and Christians are freed from them (see also Peter in Acts 10).
The same line of thought also comes from liberal “Christians” who want to ignore certain parts of what the church has been taught in the New Testament. If you eat ham, then you’re picking out only what you want, so we can throw out anything else as well, they’ll say, like sexual immorality, qualifications of church leaders, and so on.
Wrong. It’s another tactic of rebellion. Yes, you can take your Bible seriously and not be caught up in Mosaic Law, without being contradictory.
It’s simply theology 101.