IBFer here. . You asked how IBF churches decide between what OT laws to apply to the church and which to not. The are two real life answers.
1 - They don't decide. -They are puppets following the leader of their Alma Mater or favorite mega church. They read their sermons, blogs, letters etc. Others just mix and match their favorite pastors and leaders beliefs. They never compare the scriptures to others to make informed decisions. This is why many view their convictions as differing from Pastor to Pastor and/or man-made.
2 - They do decide - but as local independent churches they may decide differently. Even though they may take many hours of personal study there final results will probably differ because they are humans.
A better question may be what Scriptures defend a Grace position versus a Strict Obedience position.
First let me brake down the positions as I see them.
Grace - All O.T. Law is abolished unless restated in NT -
Common Scriptures Galatians 2:19, Romans 7:6
A huge red flag with these scriptures is how they are often presented with little to no context.
Through context Galatians 2 is shown to be talking about how the law cannot save but grace can. The context is not the Christian or the church but Salvation.
19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.
16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Romans 7 is Paul speaking as a saved Christian so we do know that it deals with the Christian's view of the law.
6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
While verse 6 does say we are delivered from the law it also say when we were dead we were held in the law. Being saved is often referred to as life so it can be referring to freedom from Hell (Obedience) or abolishment of law (Grace)
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
Verses 12-14 tell us the Law purpose was to show us all Fall short of Gods glory. This seems to point to the Obedience point of view that many OT laws still apply to Christians.
Strict Obedience - O.T. Law stands unless abolished by NT scriptures
Now let me point out some common arguments for Specific commands.
1- Food - one of the more common yet still confusing because NT church dealt with 2 food issues. First was Jewish diet and second was food offered to idols. The vision is the most common referenced under Strict Obedience rhetoric while Grace rhetoric will often point to Paul's teaching that the weaker Christians were worried about creating rules about eating and the stronger Christians just ate in private and in public did not. Some expand this argument to imply that worrying to much about standards makes you a weaker Christian. Some IBFers expand their argument to imply that all Civil Law is abolished - but this brings up your question - how to determine Civil versus Moral law?
2 - Ceremonial laws - These are the laws of Sacrifice, construction of the temple, order of priesthood etc. - This is another common one. While I personally cannot think of one reference that says these are abolished the NT has hundreds of references to the organization of the church, priesthood of believer, etc. Even the OT states that sacrifices were simply a picture of Jesus (most noticeably Isiah)
One of the biggest pet peeves of the Grace crowd is the emphasize on tithing by the IBF crowd. Would tithing not fall under Ceremonial laws? While it is true Tithing is not mentioned in the epistles Paul often talked about giving for needs of the ministry, ministers and church members. Also Jesus himself taught his disciples about tithing.
Matthew 23
1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
3 - The verse says so - While this one take much study there are verses that tell you whether the command to come is moral or civil. Now I don't think any say "This command is only for Jews" but many say things like - When you conquer the land, When you come into the land to posses it. These were often rules on what to plant and promises on what God would provide for them. God blessed Israel greatly by giving them wells and houses that hey did not have to build.
4 - The examples - these are the push button topics. This is because they are the ones that honestly are hard to explain under the rhetoric whether Grace or Strict Obedience.
Two common ones for Strict Obedience were mentioned on this thread. Mixing cattle and mixing materials . The two references are - Leviticus 19:19 and Duet 22:11
Leviticus 19 also mentions a third push button topic - mixing seed.
19 Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.
Most would argue that these are things Christians do everyday - but do they?
1- Mixing kinds of cattle - Every young creationist knows kind refers more closely to species then genus. So mating a horse and donkey would be ok but mating a cow and a horse would be wrong.
2 - Mingled seed - notice it does not say two seeds but mingled seed. We know from the parable of the sower - farmers often threw their seed quite sporadically in the field. If you mingled the seed then you would have carrots growing among potatoes.
3. Mingles materials - same concept - Not saying you shouldn't wear a cotton shirt with a leather jacket but saying don't try to sow two different materials together. Even most synthetic materials are a blend of something old to make ONE new material (like mixing red and blue to make purple)
Now I am sure some will attack this point as Subjective morality but let me mention a point often misidentified as a Strict Obedience push button topic - Slavery. Slavery is mentioned in NT but I bet many of those whom would attack this point have studied the verses and could give similar defenses for the verses in the NT about slavery. Of course an unskilled debater would attack them as presenting subjective morality but I hope if you attack this point you can present evidence and not emotion.
Finally and probably most importantly is point of view.
I see on both sides a tendency to prejudge the other point of view and to focus on the worst attributes. Like I mentioned at the beginning Yes their are IBF churches that are puppets but their are many others that studiously made the decision on where they would set their standards. Yes their are Grace churches that use grace as a buzz word to embrace homosexuality, drunkenness, and other socially accepted sins but their are many others that studied the NT and follow the commands there in. Both sides must recognize the worst in themselves and that not everyone on the other side believes exactly the same as well.
As an aside I must make a differentiation between viewpoint and interpretation. Will use an push button example - pants. Under both viewpoints modesty is a command all Christians should worry about. But both will place the standard at different places.
1 - They don't decide. -They are puppets following the leader of their Alma Mater or favorite mega church. They read their sermons, blogs, letters etc. Others just mix and match their favorite pastors and leaders beliefs. They never compare the scriptures to others to make informed decisions. This is why many view their convictions as differing from Pastor to Pastor and/or man-made.
2 - They do decide - but as local independent churches they may decide differently. Even though they may take many hours of personal study there final results will probably differ because they are humans.
A better question may be what Scriptures defend a Grace position versus a Strict Obedience position.
First let me brake down the positions as I see them.
Grace - All O.T. Law is abolished unless restated in NT -
Common Scriptures Galatians 2:19, Romans 7:6
A huge red flag with these scriptures is how they are often presented with little to no context.
Through context Galatians 2 is shown to be talking about how the law cannot save but grace can. The context is not the Christian or the church but Salvation.
19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.
16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Romans 7 is Paul speaking as a saved Christian so we do know that it deals with the Christian's view of the law.
6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
While verse 6 does say we are delivered from the law it also say when we were dead we were held in the law. Being saved is often referred to as life so it can be referring to freedom from Hell (Obedience) or abolishment of law (Grace)
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
Verses 12-14 tell us the Law purpose was to show us all Fall short of Gods glory. This seems to point to the Obedience point of view that many OT laws still apply to Christians.
Strict Obedience - O.T. Law stands unless abolished by NT scriptures
Now let me point out some common arguments for Specific commands.
1- Food - one of the more common yet still confusing because NT church dealt with 2 food issues. First was Jewish diet and second was food offered to idols. The vision is the most common referenced under Strict Obedience rhetoric while Grace rhetoric will often point to Paul's teaching that the weaker Christians were worried about creating rules about eating and the stronger Christians just ate in private and in public did not. Some expand this argument to imply that worrying to much about standards makes you a weaker Christian. Some IBFers expand their argument to imply that all Civil Law is abolished - but this brings up your question - how to determine Civil versus Moral law?
2 - Ceremonial laws - These are the laws of Sacrifice, construction of the temple, order of priesthood etc. - This is another common one. While I personally cannot think of one reference that says these are abolished the NT has hundreds of references to the organization of the church, priesthood of believer, etc. Even the OT states that sacrifices were simply a picture of Jesus (most noticeably Isiah)
One of the biggest pet peeves of the Grace crowd is the emphasize on tithing by the IBF crowd. Would tithing not fall under Ceremonial laws? While it is true Tithing is not mentioned in the epistles Paul often talked about giving for needs of the ministry, ministers and church members. Also Jesus himself taught his disciples about tithing.
Matthew 23
1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
3 - The verse says so - While this one take much study there are verses that tell you whether the command to come is moral or civil. Now I don't think any say "This command is only for Jews" but many say things like - When you conquer the land, When you come into the land to posses it. These were often rules on what to plant and promises on what God would provide for them. God blessed Israel greatly by giving them wells and houses that hey did not have to build.
4 - The examples - these are the push button topics. This is because they are the ones that honestly are hard to explain under the rhetoric whether Grace or Strict Obedience.
Two common ones for Strict Obedience were mentioned on this thread. Mixing cattle and mixing materials . The two references are - Leviticus 19:19 and Duet 22:11
Leviticus 19 also mentions a third push button topic - mixing seed.
19 Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.
Most would argue that these are things Christians do everyday - but do they?
1- Mixing kinds of cattle - Every young creationist knows kind refers more closely to species then genus. So mating a horse and donkey would be ok but mating a cow and a horse would be wrong.
2 - Mingled seed - notice it does not say two seeds but mingled seed. We know from the parable of the sower - farmers often threw their seed quite sporadically in the field. If you mingled the seed then you would have carrots growing among potatoes.
3. Mingles materials - same concept - Not saying you shouldn't wear a cotton shirt with a leather jacket but saying don't try to sow two different materials together. Even most synthetic materials are a blend of something old to make ONE new material (like mixing red and blue to make purple)
Now I am sure some will attack this point as Subjective morality but let me mention a point often misidentified as a Strict Obedience push button topic - Slavery. Slavery is mentioned in NT but I bet many of those whom would attack this point have studied the verses and could give similar defenses for the verses in the NT about slavery. Of course an unskilled debater would attack them as presenting subjective morality but I hope if you attack this point you can present evidence and not emotion.
Finally and probably most importantly is point of view.
I see on both sides a tendency to prejudge the other point of view and to focus on the worst attributes. Like I mentioned at the beginning Yes their are IBF churches that are puppets but their are many others that studiously made the decision on where they would set their standards. Yes their are Grace churches that use grace as a buzz word to embrace homosexuality, drunkenness, and other socially accepted sins but their are many others that studied the NT and follow the commands there in. Both sides must recognize the worst in themselves and that not everyone on the other side believes exactly the same as well.
As an aside I must make a differentiation between viewpoint and interpretation. Will use an push button example - pants. Under both viewpoints modesty is a command all Christians should worry about. But both will place the standard at different places.
