Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Growing and Free for All

$5.00

The Old Testament and Jesus’ Endorsement

Many approach the Old Testament with a perception that it depicts a harsh system of morals, filled with accounts of violence and questionable behaviors. However, a careful reading shows that the One who is central to the Christian faith—Jesus—wholly affirmed the truth and ethical validity of what the Scriptures teach. Jesus was clear that he had not come to dismantle or nullify the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 5:17). Though he used expressions such as “you have heard that it was said … but I say to you,” these words did not undermine the authenticity of the old revelation. They corrected human misinterpretations and went deeper into the principles already present in the Old Testament (Matthew 5:21–22, 27–28).

When Jesus taught about loving enemies (Matthew 5:44), he was not contradicting the Old Testament, which instructs God’s people to show love and kindness to foreigners (Leviticus 19:33–34) and repeatedly calls for righteous treatment of neighbors (Leviticus 19:18). Jesus’ manner of intensifying the Law clarifies that the Old Testament reflected divine holiness. He consistently upheld it as the Word of God, stating that “the Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35). This underscores the high place Jesus gave to the older covenantal texts.

Descriptions Versus Approvals

Readers can stumble over stories filled with disturbing events, assuming these narratives demonstrate God’s approval of sinful actions. The Old Testament faithfully records what people actually did, including their failings, deceptions, violent actions, and moral transgressions. Such descriptions are not endorsements. When Lot offered his daughters to a mob (Genesis 19:8) or when Abraham misled others about Sarah (Genesis 12:13; 20:2), those passages recount factual events. They do not affirm that God approved these choices.

The Scripture provides realistic portrayals of human depravity, showing that even those chosen to fulfill God’s purposes were capable of grave sin. King David, though highly valued as a man after Jehovah’s own heart (1 Samuel 13:14), committed adultery and arranged a murder (2 Samuel 11:2–15). The text reveals David’s subsequent repentance (Psalm 51), illustrating that the Old Testament depicts flawed individuals pursued by a patient, compassionate God. The ethical center remains God’s unchanging standard. Whether in narratives or in legal sections, the Old Testament does not commend sin but highlights divine mercy toward a fallen world.

Contexts of Violence and Warfare

Few topics raise more ethical questions than warfare in the Old Testament, particularly the conquest of Canaan. Critics point to passages that describe the destruction of entire cities (Joshua 6:21) and question how these events can fit with the holiness and love of God. Reflecting on this period reveals key realities.

First, the conquest was confined to a unique stage in Israel’s history. According to Old Testament chronology, the Exodus took place in 1446 B.C.E., and the following generation entered Canaan around 1406 B.C.E. The directive to drive out the Canaanites was not repeated endlessly through Israel’s ongoing existence. Many later conflicts were waged for human agendas and were not sanctioned by Jehovah (Hosea 8:4).

Second, the language describing total destruction often employs the rhetoric of ancient warfare. Near Eastern records commonly used terms of complete annihilation, even when subsequent narratives showed that entire populations were not literally obliterated (Joshua 10:20, Judges 1:21, 27–36). The expressions signaled a crushing defeat but did not necessarily indicate that no survivors remained in any circumstances.

Third, Scripture frames the conquest as a judgment upon a society the Bible portrays as morally corrupt (Deuteronomy 9:4–5). Genesis 15:16 had foretold that Israel’s entry would be delayed, because the wrongdoing of the Canaanites had not yet reached its full measure. The idolatrous, often depraved practices in that region—such as child sacrifice (Deuteronomy 12:31)—brought divine condemnation. God’s choice to execute judgment through Israel parallels how he later used foreign nations (such as Babylon) to punish Israel itself when they fell into equivalent sinful patterns (2 Kings 17:7–23). This demonstrates a consistent principle: those who do evil, whether Israelites or others, face divine discipline.

Fourth, the situation foreshadows a greater final judgment (2 Peter 2:5–6). Just as the Flood or the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah served as examples of divine justice, the conquest depicts an anticipation of ultimate accountability. Yet even within that scenario, instances of grace appear, such as Rahab’s preservation through her acknowledgment of Jehovah’s power (Joshua 2:9–14; 6:25). The Old Testament message is that those who humbly seek refuge in the God of Israel can find mercy.

“Eye for Eye” as Ethical Restraint

The phrase “eye for eye, tooth for tooth” (Exodus 21:24) is widely misunderstood as harsh sanctioning of revenge. Instead, it established a principle of proportional justice, ensuring that a punishment would not exceed the offense. The purpose was to restrain violent retribution. This was a remarkable advance in an age when vengeance often spiraled without limit. It operated as a legal standard, preventing arbitrary punishments. The people of Israel were taught that they could not lawfully claim two lives for a single life lost. The standard of “one for one” was actually a strong measure for justice, not a blanket permission for ferocity.

Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:38–39, often summarized as “turn the other cheek,” did not abolish the Old Testament principle. Rather, he underscored that people can go beyond minimal justice. The Old Testament’s guideline was set to limit excessive punishment. Jesus emphasized that a faithful heart can practice mercy rather than merely settle for legal equity. While the Old Testament standard protected the principle of fairness, Jesus offered a path of self-restraint that can surpass even the fair penalty.

Confronting Capital Punishment

Critics raise concerns about laws endorsing the death penalty for certain offenses (Exodus 21:12–17; Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22). They ask whether such punishment conflicts with the sanctity of life. Observing the Old Testament in its total context reveals that these were not the random outbursts of an unmerciful system. Each case involved a severe violation that threatened the stability or purity of the community. Murder (Exodus 21:14), certain extreme sexual sins (Leviticus 20:10), and persistent idolatries were singled out because they undermined the core identity of Israel’s covenant relationship with Jehovah.

Before someone was condemned, evidence had to be carefully weighed. Deuteronomy 17:6 specifies that there must be at least two witnesses to convict anyone of a capital crime. This standard guarded against frivolous or malicious accusations. The Old Testament’s rationale for capital punishment drew on the principle that humans bear God’s image (Genesis 9:6). To willfully destroy life was, in effect, to attack the dignity of God’s creative work. Such seriousness aimed to preserve the sanctity of life rather than diminish it.

It is also notable that from a Christian perspective, the apostle Paul described governing authorities as not bearing the sword in vain (Romans 13:4). This indicates that the concept of capital punishment for grave offenses carried into the New Testament era in principle, although how it was administered could vary across societies. The Old Testament’s legal system was part of Israel’s covenant arrangement, tailored to their theocratic identity. Its function was not the unbounded encouragement of violence but the preservation of communal holiness and justice.

Human Sacrifice Versus Abraham and Isaac

Some question the account of God commanding Abraham to offer Isaac (Genesis 22:2), asserting that it conflicts with Old Testament laws forbidding human sacrifice (Leviticus 18:21; 20:2–5). The narrative of Abraham does not condone human sacrifice. It is a test of Abraham’s faith, culminating in God stopping Abraham at the critical moment, providing a ram in place of Isaac (Genesis 22:10–13). The story shows that Jehovah does not delight in human bloodshed; rather, it highlights the seriousness of obedience and underscores God’s gracious deliverance. Israel’s Law strictly condemned sacrificing children to false gods. The Abrahamic test stands alone, illustrating the depth of Abraham’s devotion and the certainty of God’s mercy. It is not a template permitting the offering of human lives. Repeatedly, the Old Testament condemns human sacrifice, which was often practiced in Canaanite religions (Deuteronomy 12:31).

Treatment of Slavery

Another ethical concern arises from Old Testament references to slavery. Modern readers can assume that the Scripture’s mention of slave laws endorses the institution. Observing how the Old Testament deals with this reality clarifies a very different perspective. The texts regulating slavery aimed to mitigate its harms and promote humane treatment in a fallen world. For instance, Israelites who found themselves enslaved because of debt were to be freed after six years (Exodus 21:2; Deuteronomy 15:12). Those who became slaves still had rights: a weekly day of rest (Exodus 20:10), participation in festivals (Deuteronomy 16:11), and protection from abuse. If a master harmed a slave in certain ways, that slave was set free (Exodus 21:26–27).

These regulations were not the ideal expression of God’s creation intent. Humanity’s disobedience introduced social injustices, and God imposed legal guidelines to restrain cruelty and safeguard vulnerable individuals. Far from endorsing chattel slavery as practiced in other cultures, the Old Testament laws positioned slaves as fellow human beings, not mere property. By instituting limits and requiring eventual release of Hebrew slaves, the Old Testament set a moral direction that undermined the permanence of enslaving one’s own countrymen. This stands in contrast to the unbridled practices of many nations in the ancient Near East.

Polygamy and Its Regulation

The Old Testament records that certain individuals, including patriarchs and kings, had multiple wives. Critics sometimes assume that Scripture endorses polygamy. Yet the overall message is quite different. The earliest chapters of Genesis depict marriage as a union between one man and one woman (Genesis 2:24). The subsequent introduction of polygamy is consistently associated with family discord and complications, as seen in the accounts of Abraham, Jacob, and David. The legal material in the Law of Moses does not celebrate polygamy but acknowledges its existence and imposes protections. If a man married an additional wife, he was required to ensure food, clothing, and marital rights for the first wife (Exodus 21:10). This stipulation sought to limit the harm to women and to prevent them from being exploited.

God’s original design for marriage is underscored when the prophets condemn unfaithfulness, likening it to the act of taking multiple partners (Hosea 2:2–5). The Old Testament preserves these laws to mitigate the damage of a practice that does not reflect God’s ideal. By the time we reach New Testament revelation, monogamy is reinforced as the standard for Christian overseers (1 Timothy 3:2). This continuity shows that the Old Testament laws were concessions to the hardness of human hearts, not endorsements of polygamy as a noble ideal.

Distinguishing Ceremonial from Moral

The Old Testament contains ceremonial aspects intertwined with moral teachings. When the Ten Commandments instruct Israel to remember the Sabbath (Exodus 20:8–11), a ceremony is introduced that pertains to worship and the rhythm of Israel’s communal life. At the same time, moral imperatives underlie the act of ceasing from labor: humility before God and trust in his providence. Jesus’ discussions of the Sabbath (Matthew 12:1–12) illustrate that while the ceremonial dimension pointed to reverence, the deeper significance was the moral principle of doing good and honoring God. The early Christians recognized that the substance of such commandments involved love for God and neighbor (Romans 13:8–10).

By recognizing that part of Old Testament law was distinctly ceremonial, the church understood that certain regulations, including laws on ritual cleanness and the sacrificial system, pointed forward to Christ. Once Christ fulfilled these images, the ceremonial shadows ended (Hebrews 10:1–10). Yet the moral teachings—truthful speech, faithfulness to God, respect for human life—are upheld. This indicates that the Old Testament’s ethical core transcends the historical ceremonies that governed Israel’s specific worship pattern.

The Ethical Vision of the Old Testament

At the heart of Old Testament law is the command to love God wholeheartedly and to love one’s neighbor (Deuteronomy 6:5; Leviticus 19:18). Jesus labeled these the greatest commandments (Matthew 22:37–39). The Old Testament is saturated with calls to do justice for the needy, the fatherless, and the widow (Exodus 22:22–24; Deuteronomy 24:17–22; Isaiah 1:17). These demands exceed narrow legalism. They beckon believers to show heartfelt mercy, reflecting God’s own character (Psalm 103:8). The prophets insisted that religious rites are meaningless if not matched by righteousness in daily life (Isaiah 58:6–7; Amos 5:21–24). Their strong words warn that God is not impressed by ceremonious observance if there is no compassion for the disadvantaged.

In many ways, the Old Testament’s moral instructions surpass what was common in neighboring ancient cultures. The Babylonian or Assyrian codes might allow severe physical punishments without limiting the master’s rights over a slave’s life. Israel’s code recognized a slave’s personhood. Likewise, a high view of marriage emerges from Genesis onward, even if polygamy existed. The consistent emphasis on caring for sojourners is unparalleled in many pagan societies (Deuteronomy 10:19). The Old Testament sets a standard that reveals the heart of God.

The Final Judgment Foreshadowed

Old Testament events that appear harsh—like the global Flood (Genesis 7) or the judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19)—fit into a broader scriptural understanding of the final accountability that humanity faces. These episodes served as living warnings. They signaled that God does not overlook flagrant evil indefinitely. Likewise, the conquest of Canaan was a small-scale demonstration of righteous judgment after long periods of patience (Genesis 15:16). Rahab’s story (Joshua 2; 6:22–25) reveals that repentance and a turn to the God of Israel could bring rescue, even in times of sweeping judgment.

The Old Testament, therefore, consistently aligns with the idea that God’s justice eventually deals with unrepentant wickedness. This is not arbitrary cruelty. Rather, it underscores the moral dimension under God’s sovereignty. Individuals can find refuge and forgiveness. Nations that persist in disobedience eventually encounter the consequences of their sin. This principle applies to Israelites and non-Israelites alike (Jeremiah 18:7–10). The Old Testament’s portrayal of a righteous Judge who both punishes evil and extends mercy is fully compatible with the New Testament’s depiction of final judgment and salvation.

Jesus’ Summation of the Law and the Prophets

Jesus summarized the Old Testament law in two straightforward principles: love God and love neighbor (Matthew 22:36–40). This teaching did not drop out of thin air. It simply crystallized the Old Testament’s moral vision. The Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4–5) and the call to love one’s neighbor (Leviticus 19:18) were well known among devout Israelites. Jesus showed that the entire moral teaching of the Old Testament hangs on these two commands. Everything from the regulations about fair treatment of strangers to instructions on personal conduct can be traced back to these foundational imperatives.

In the Old Testament, the moral law was not intended to be a harsh burden. Deuteronomy 10:12–13 conveys that God asked Israel to revere him, walk in his ways, love and serve him with all their heart, and keep his commandments for their good. Even the ceremonial laws, though they would later be fulfilled in Christ, aimed to shape a people set apart for God’s service. Failure to comply brought negative outcomes, not because the laws were unkind, but because they upheld divine holiness.

Handling Difficult Passages

Some passages remain challenging. How could God instruct entire cities to be devoted to destruction (1 Samuel 15:3)? Why did he regulate slavery (Exodus 21) rather than ban it outright? Why was polygamy not categorically outlawed? The biblical answer begins with the recognition that humanity resides in a sinful condition. God’s laws often address the reality of social customs already ingrained in ancient societies, imposing moral checks and requiring better treatment. The direction is consistently toward greater compassion and justice.

It is essential to distinguish between principles and permissions. Jesus pointed out that divorce was permitted in the Law of Moses because of people’s hardness of heart (Matthew 19:8). The permission did not signal God’s desire. In a similar manner, the Law’s handling of slavery or polygamy is a divinely imposed regulation to constrain the harm caused by these practices in a fallen world. The Old Testament consistently reveals that God’s ultimate goal is a society characterized by love and holiness, where moral and social ills are curbed. The partial measures of legal texts were never the final ethic, but stepping-stones guiding people to higher moral ground.

The Old Testament in Christian Understanding

The question of whether Christians today must keep Old Testament commands arises often. The short answer is that Jesus’ sacrificial work fulfilled the ceremonial aspects of the Law (Hebrews 7:27; 10:1–14). Through this fulfillment, the ceremonial ordinances have reached their intended goal. The moral teachings, however, remain central for Christian living because they reflect God’s unchanging righteousness. The apostle Paul explained that love is the fulfillment of the Law (Romans 13:8–10). That statement echoes the consistent witness of the Old Testament, which calls the faithful to practice justice, mercy, and humble fellowship with their Creator (Micah 6:8).

Christians are not bound to observe every ritual or civil detail of Israel’s ancient covenant, since those elements were uniquely tied to Israel’s national theocracy. The higher principle is that the moral core—reverence for God, respect for human life, sincerity in worship, and integrity in dealings with others—remains valid. These qualities flow from the character of Jehovah himself, who does not change (Malachi 3:6).

The Ethical Grandeur of the Old Testament

Old Testament laws, including the Ten Commandments, upheld a high view of human dignity and a resolute commitment to truthfulness and faithfulness. Respect for parents (Exodus 20:12) not only contributed to stable family life but also anchored the community in generational continuity. Faithfulness in marriage (Exodus 20:14) guarded the covenant bond. Protection of life (Exodus 20:13) affirmed that humans belong to God. Prohibition against stealing (Exodus 20:15) and bearing false witness (Exodus 20:16) underscored the vital importance of trust and honesty in society. Banning covetousness (Exodus 20:17) exposed the roots of envy and greed that lead to social breakdown. These commands continue to shape moral reasoning.

The prophets broadened this ethical framework by condemning the oppression of the poor, the fatherless, and the widow (Isaiah 1:23; Amos 2:6–7). They emphasized that genuine worship of God demands living out his compassion and righteousness. In short, the Old Testament’s ethic aims at both individual conduct and communal flourishing. Leaders were not exempt from accountability, as seen in prophets rebuking kings (2 Samuel 12:7–9; 1 Kings 21:17–19). The entire community was called to align itself with divine holiness.

Unity with the New Testament Message

Far from presenting a contradiction to the love and grace taught in the New Testament, the Old Testament lays the foundational moral truths on which the New Testament builds. The apostle Paul declared that “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching” (2 Timothy 3:16). When he wrote these words, the recognized body of Scripture was primarily the Old Testament. Its ethical counsel remains instructive for believers, helping them understand God’s standards of righteousness and grace.

Jesus frequently drew upon Old Testament teachings to illustrate the love that God desires. When asked about the greatest commandment, he quoted Deuteronomy 6:5. When teaching about the second greatest commandment, he cited Leviticus 19:18. These citations highlight that the Old Testament’s moral instructions are the bedrock of his message. What Jesus did was clarify and personify that ethic in his own life, culminating in his sacrificial death and resurrection.

Balancing Judgment and Mercy

One of the Old Testament’s profound lessons is that God holds nations and individuals accountable, yet he offers paths to repentance and forgiveness. From the earliest chapters of Genesis, God consistently responds to human sin, but with readiness to rescue those who seek him. Abraham prayed for Sodom, asking God to spare the righteous (Genesis 18:23–32). Although Sodom was destroyed, God delivered Lot (Genesis 19:29). This pattern is evident throughout Israel’s history: the nation undergoes severe judgments, such as the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 B.C.E., but a remnant finds restoration (Jeremiah 23:3).

This interplay of judgment and grace resonates deeply with the New Testament. Jesus speaks of the broad path leading to destruction (Matthew 7:13) yet offers the free gift of salvation to those who believe (John 3:16). The Old Testament presents the same God who both stands against unrepentant sin and draws near to the humble (Isaiah 57:15). These truths never conflict. The moral instructions of the Old Testament reflect the righteousness inherent in God’s character, while its narratives reveal his merciful dealings with flawed people.

Conclusion

The Old Testament’s ethical framework reveals God’s holiness, highlights the dignity and worth of human beings, and sets forth calls to justice, faithfulness, and love. Despite the presence of difficult accounts, a balanced reading shows that these events are either God’s just judgment upon entrenched wickedness or descriptions of sinful human decisions that the text itself does not endorse. The harsh aspects of certain laws reflect the reality of addressing a fallen humanity in a particular historical context. Ceremonial commands point forward to their fulfillment in Jesus Christ.

Jesus accepted the Old Testament as fully inspired. He drew from it to summarize ethical duties to God and neighbor, corrected misuses of its teachings, and displayed how God’s commandments always intended to foster love and mercy. The moral core of the Old Testament—devotion to Jehovah and compassion toward one’s fellow man—remains central. A correct reading of the Old Testament perceives that its laws, narratives, and prophetic messages function together to guide believers into a deeper awareness of God’s perfect standards and benevolent purposes. It is indeed consistent to affirm that the Old Testament, read in light of its original meaning and the broader biblical revelation, stands as a valuable, divinely given source of ethical truth.

You May Also Enjoy

What Is the Role of Apologetics in Defending the Christian Faith?

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).