Jumpstarter 2 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 2

Bercot says the “Constantinian Hybrid” tried to paste “New Testament theology and ordinances onto Old Testament morals and lifestyle”; where do you see that kind of selective blending happening in the chapter’s examples, and where do you see it in your own church tradition?

Another way to ask: Where in the chapter do you see people mixing New Testament practices with Old Testament morals and lifestyle in a pick-and-choose way? Where do you see that same kind of mix in your own church background?

Direct Answer The transcript’s examples show selective blending by keeping Christian language and structures while using Old Testament permissions to justify wealth, oaths, social hierarchy, and violence, yet still prohibiting certain sins using Old Testament morality. The question’s second part isn’t answered in the transcript, so any application to a specific church tradition must come from the reader.

Support from Transcript:

Wool calls it the “Constantinian Hybrid”: “paste New Testament theology and ordinances onto Old Testament morals and lifestyle.”
Rule of thumb: “if something had been lawful for the Jews, it now was considered lawful for Christians.”
Wealth: because there was “no Old Testament commandment” against storing treasures, it became “all right” for Christians.
Oaths: “Since oaths were lawful in the Old Testament, they were lawful in the new hybrid.”
Non-resistance: because the Old Testament “didn’t teach” loving enemies, “now the Church didn’t teach it either.”
Moral prohibitions still enforced: “sexual immorality, divination, and witchcraft were not allowed…for they are forbidden in the Old Testament.”

Discussion Follow-ups In your setting, where do Christians appeal to Old Testament patterns mainly when they support comfort, respectability, or power? Where do we do the opposite—ignoring Old Testament material when it would cost us?

Jumpstarter 2 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 2 of 10