Import jQuery

Showing posts with label paul's letters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label paul's letters. Show all posts

New episode: Tackling Romans for Messianic Believers

John and Judah discussing Romans...and swear words

In this new episode of Messianic Walk, John and Judah tackle the book of Romans and its pressing questions for Messianic believers:

Specifically,

  • 08:35 When Paul says, “A true Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is of the heart, in spirit and not in letter” (Rom 2), is he saying Gentiles are spiritual Jews?
  • 18:32 Digging deeper on “a true Jew…”: if it speaks only to Jews, why is Paul talking about Jews and Gentiles in the previous verses and context of Romans 2?
  • 24:12 Paul speaks about the righteousness of “Gentiles who do by nature the things of the Torah” (Rom 2): is this the moral law, the full Mosaic law, or something else?
  • 37:09 Paul tells the Romans, “We are released from the Torah” (Rom 7). Does this mean the Torah has no relevance the lives of Messianic believers?
  • 49:05 Sidebar, a relevant example of why we need scholarship in the Messianic movement.
  • 54:49 Paul writes, “Let every person submit himself to the governing authorities” (Rom 13). In the coronavirus era, how should this play out? Governors are issuing mandates to wear masks, quarantine for indefinite periods of time, close churches and social gatherings. Should Messianic believers submit themselves to these authorities, or are these issues going beyond what Paul had in view?
  • 1:16:00 Romans 13 speaks about not causing others to stumble over issues of food. Can this be applied to kosher standards today in the Messianic movement? Is it wise use of Romans 13 to discourage Messianic folks from taking a stand over kosher issues? Or can we cite Paul’s “the Kingdom of God is not about eating and drinking” and tell people that food ultimately doesn’t matter to God?
  • 1:31:20 So many missteps with Paul’s letters began with misapplying or overapplying Paul’s words in a specific context to a broader context. How can Messianics apply Scripture today without over-applying it; without getting off on erroneous tangents by misapplying Scripture to overly broad contexts?

I learned a lot just by chatting with John about these issues. I think you will too, fine Kineti reader.

The Messianic Walk: Episode 2 - Did the early Roman believers really celebrate Passover?


In the 2nd episode of The Messianic Walk, J.K. and I discuss the theological objections to Torah observance from a friend, Jonathan, who recently left the Hebrew Roots movement for the mainstream Church.


We tackle several challenges to Torah observance, including:
  • Does Matthew 5 really say the Torah is still in effect?
  • Has God changed, or have people changed? If people changed, does it means God’s law applies differently?
  • Is the Sabbath merely a cultural commandment, meant only for Bronze Age Israel?
  • Did the Christian community at Rome really celebrate Passover?

That last one was an interesting question. My friend who left Torah, Jonathan, had objected to Torah observance by appealing to the book of Romans, saying that Paul's rebuke of sinful Rome was only a rebuke of breaking the moral law, which surely doesn't include laws about Passover:

"Were kosher, feasts and sabbath part of this [moral] law?  Romans 2:14-15 “For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,” I doubt that a gentile would accidentally keep kosher."

My response is that the leaders of the Roman believers, Acquila and Priscilla, were both Jewish believers who were almost certainly keeping Passover. And that they were ousted with other Jews from Rome during Claudius' reign suggests they were identifiably Jewish. My reasoning, then, is if the leaders of the Roman believers were celebrating Passover, it's reasonable to conclude the laypeople of the Roman community were following their example.

In the podcast, J.K. shed further light on this: many of the laypeople in the Roman community were the "God fearers" of the 1st century: non-Jews who followed the God of Israel, attended synagogue, but lived as righteous gentiles among the nations. These folks too would be likely to celebrate Passover, all the more given Yeshua's imbuing the feast with new meaning.

Check out the podcast, friends, I think you'll enjoy this discussion on Torah, faith, Romans, and the early believers.

One final note, I'm glad to report that we've started a new website home for the podcast: messianicwalk.com. Additionally, the Messianic Walk podcast is now available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, and Podcast Addict. 😎

Paul’s Identity as a Messianic Jew: A Necessity for a More Accurate Interpretation of His Letters

image

I’ve been teaching on Romans at my local Messianic congregation in Minnesota. It’s a Pauline deep dive from a Messianic perspective: starting with the premise that Paul is a Jew who is Torah-observant and considers himself part of a global Judaism centered around the Jewish Messiah.

This premise – which I believe is evident in the New Testament – brings us to better, more sound interpretation of Paul’s letters, which are often difficult to understand.

For example, Paul’s statements on the Torah appear conflicting. Consider:

  • Negative: “The Torah came in so that sin might increase.”  (Rom 5)
  • Positive: “The Torah is holy, good, and righteous.” (Rom 7)

How we interpret each of these statements creates either a negative or positive view of the Torah in modern followers of Jesus. Does Paul see the Torah as good and useful for instruction? (And thus, shouldn’t we?) Or is it an obsolete document no longer to be followed?

Here’s where our premises – our theological assumptions – are important: Paul’s statements about the Torah are more accurately understood if we grasp his identity.

Much of Christianity views Paul as an ex-Jew who ditched his Hebrew name, converted and helped start a new gentile religion. If this is to be believed, we can read Paul’s statements on the Torah in the negative. It exacerbates: if Paul is negative on the Torah, then grace, favor, and righteousness are pitted in opposition to God’s law. This negative view has produced all kinds of anti-Judaism and even anti-Semitism within historical Christianity. I think Paul the Jew would be horrified.

I see things in a more positive light: Paul remained a faithful, Torah-observant Jew, but was changed forever upon finding Judaism’s Messiah. It changed his direction and plans for life. Surpassing Paul’s grandest hopes and dreams, this Jewish Messiah would bring the whole world to know the God of Israel; creating an enlarged commonwealth of Israel whose members are not just Jews, but people from all nations. Not by circumcision and conversion to Judaism – God required no such thing - but by trusting in the Jewish Messiah. Paul saw himself as an instrument in bringing the whole world to the Jewish God.

This premise, I argue, is a better premise for accurately understanding Paul’s statements on Torah, faith, works, justification, and grace.

And this has been my area of study and teaching at my local congregation for over a year, now on my 12th teaching on Romans. As a study guide, I’m using the excellent Romans for the Practical Messianic by Messianic apologetic J.K. McKee.

image
Romans for the Practical Messianic engages with relevant Jewish and Christian scholarship, in addition to Messianic theologians like David Stern, Tim Hegg, Daniel Lancaster, and others. It takes a conservative Biblical stance while approaching the letter from the premise that Paul is a Torah-observant Jew.

Romans in Simple Terms

Putting a teaching together usually takes me 4-5 days. A helpful aide in all this is putting the text in question into my own words. I find that if I can put the text into my own words, it shows I am at least understanding the words on the page, if not the meaning behind them.

imageThe masterful teacher and physicist Richard Feynman once said, “What I cannot create, I do not understand.” My takeaway from that is, if I can’t explain something in simple terms, I don’t understand it.

I’m teaching on Romans 5 this Shabbat. Can I explain it in simple terms? Here’s my attempt. I leave you fine Kineti readers with Romans 5 in my own words:

God saw our simple trusting in Messiah, saw it was good, and set us right with Him. Because of this, we have shalom with God. This same trusting has caused us to enter into new divine favor. We bask in this favor! Shouting from the rooftops the hope we have in Him: the hope of eternal life by being raised from the dead.

We are glad even in suffering for the sake of Messiah's reputation. Suffering produces perseverance and endurance. The end result is character and hope. And all who hope in Him won't be disappointed! Even now, He's poured out His spirit on us, our hearts filled to overflowing.

Think back: we were evil people; helpless and blind to the things of God. Then, at the time appointed by God, Messiah forfeited His own life for us ungodly people. What righteousness! How rare it is that someone gives up his life to save even a righteous man. But God's greatness surpasses this still: showing how much He loves us by giving up His life even while we were evil! Messiah's work set us right with God, but above this, it saved us from God's wrath. His wrath would have been justified; after all, we were enemies of God by how we lived. But instead of wrath, God had a better plan in Messiah. His death caused us to have life, both today and in the age to come.

In the beginning, one man did wicked things and introduced evil into the world. With evil came its natural outcome: death. Now, all humanity is prone to the same: evil actions, and eventually death. How do we know what's evil and what's good? God defined this precisely in the Torah. What about before the Torah? Sin was still sin before then, but people didn't know. Thus, people still died, because it was still wickedness even before the Torah explained it.

Here’s the marvelous parallel: One man, Adam, did evil and it introduced death to all humanity. Now, one Man did something so grand and good, God's favor overflows onto the whole world. One man's evil action produced a death sentence for humanity, but Messiah's action produced an overflow of God's favor: life forever with Him. One man rebelled against God, and so God condemned him and all humanity. But one Man's righteousness caused billions to be set right with God.

God gave the Torah to amplify the reality of human evil and it's life-destroying outcome. But where sin became more apparent, God's forgiveness and favor multiplied. So while sin and death reign in humanity, God redeemed the situation by Messiah’s work. Before, sin and death. Now, favor and righteousness. This righteousness is so all-consuming, it overcomes even death itself: God will raise His people from the dead in that great day, and we will reign with Him.

The Pro-Torah, Pro-Israel, Pro-Jewish Apostle Paul

image

I'm blown away by Paul’s theological thunder in Romans 2. 

In it, Paul says:

  • God judges people by their actions; it's not enough to believe. (vs. 6)
  • Jewish people have divine priority, both in blessing and judgment (vs 9, 10)
  • People who practice the Torah will be justified by God. (vs. 13)
  • The Torah is the embodiment of truth (vs. 20)
  • Breaking the Torah shames God's reputation (vss. 23, 4)
  • Non-Jews who keep the Torah are better than Jews who break it.(vs. 27)
  • God's people Israel includes non-Jews who keep the Torah. (vss. 27, 28, 29)
  • Authentic Jews are Jews who do what the Torah says and walk in a path of integrity. (vss. 28, 29)

In the church, we so often get laser focused on Paul's warning against religious Torah hypocrisy (vss. 21-24), that we forget he's still pro-Torah.

In Paul’s usage here, “Torah” doesn’t especially mean things like kosher and tzitzit and what we often think of Torah. We know this because his argument is that gentiles who never heard of the Torah do by nature the things of the Torah. (And gentiles without Torah aren’t wearing tzitzit!)

So, what is he talking about when he says gentiles keeping Torah? He’s talking about the basic ethical morality – Torah basics – that are ingrained in every human being. Knowing that murder, rape, cruelty, theft, etc. are wicked, despite never having read the Torah.

These Torah basics are inscribed by God on the human conscience. Non-Jews who keep them are better than Jews who break them. (Hence, Jews like Harvey Weinstein are not destined for God’s Kingdom – they know Torah but actively break it without remorse or repentance. Meanwhile, non-Jews who love God and love their neighbor will see God.

Is this an anti-Jewish message? Hardly. Paul comes to the climax of his argument in verses 28 and 29, saying that the authentic Jewish person is one who keeps the commandments of God. Talks and walks Torah.

Prolific Jewish Bible scholar and author Mark Nanos – himself a Reform Jew – argues that passages like Paul’s letter to Rome demonstrate that Paul wasn’t outside of Judaism and Jewish thought, but rather, he was a Jew within Judaism promoting a new kind of Messiah-based Apostolic Judaism:

image“I remain focused on investigating the implications for Jewish-Christian relations of my reading of Paul as a Torah-observant Jew founding Jewish subgroup communities. These "assemblies [ekklesias]" were attracting some non-Jews, but nevertheless dedicated to practicing and promoting Judaism for non-Jews as well as Jews. In other words, I propose to that we should be investigating Paul's Judaism in the intra-communal context of other Jewish groups, including other groups of followers of Jesus, which together with Paul's groups represented a coalition we might describe as Apostolic Judaism.

Nanos may be on to something. Paul reads to me as a pro-Torah, pro-Jewish, pro-Israel apostle of Jesus. Maybe Nanos is right; maybe Paul has been misread in the Christian world for a great deal of time, maybe even going as far to say Paul was promoting a kind of Judaism for Jews and non-Jews.

Returning to Paul’s Jewish context changes the way we read him.

More bad news for the do-nothing gospel

I'm awe-struck by this passage:

"God will pay back each person according to his works. To those persisting in doing good works by seeking glory, honor, and immortality—the payment is eternal life. But to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—the payment is wrath and fury. There will be trouble and hardship for every soul that does evil—to the Jew first and also to the Gentile. But there will be glory, honor, and shalom to everyone who does good—to the Jew first and also to the Gentile."

-Apostle Paul, Romans 2

This passage strikes me for three reasons:

  1. It undermines the "faith-only/do-nothing gospel" that says God's only requirement is belief.
  2. It tells us that God makes demands on us, and that demand is doing good works (e.g. charity). Eternal life for those who do, wrath for those who don’t.
  3. It lays out a divine order in which Israel takes precedence, both in blessing and judgment.

I think this passage upsets a great deal of Christian theology. But it’s right there in Romans, from Paul’s own mouth, only verses after saying, “The righteous shall live by faith”, here is Paul saying that good works are required of God’s people.

Service to God and people is the highest calling

It’s the 39th day of counting the omer – we’re almost there! Each day I post a little something to help me count. Previously I wrote about Bob Dylan, John Lennon, and the wicked generation. Today, the weighty cost of being a servant of Messiah.

Image result for jesus wash feet

Paul identifies himself as a “servant of Messiah Yeshua” in the opening to his letter to Rome. Paul makes two powerful theological statements in doing so:

  1. The life of a follower of Messiah is one of service; servants serve.
  2. Messiah is an appearance of God.

Life of service

Paul was powerful, relatively well-off socially and financially, held authority and respect among his peers. Trained under one of the greatest sages of Judaism, he was an expert in Torah; he remained a lifelong Pharisee even after coming to know Messiah. Engaged with the prevailing Roman culture and Hellenized world, he also was a Roman citizen with a command of Hellenistic philosophy and extra-biblical Judaic writings.

He was a big man, so to speak. Top dog.

But he he doesn’t push himself as a big man. He identifies as a low class slave. “I, Paul, slave of the Messiah Yeshua”, he says.

Slaves in the 1st century were at the bottom. Not respected, no autonomy, somebody else’s property.

Why does a powerful, educated, respected man identify as a slave?

Same reason Moses, Joshua, David, Abraham and others identified themselves as servants of God: God does big things through humble people.

Indeed, 2000 years later, we see what God did: turned a wicked and idolatrous empire – the Roman Empire and its Imperial Cult religion – to instead serve the God of Israel through Israel’s Messiah.

God made that happen primarily through Paul.

And it’s because Paul lived as a servant.

Servants sacrifice their own will for the sake of their master. Even though Paul had education, prestige, recognition among his peers, and a powerful place in society, he gave it all up.

God did big things through Paul, and it’s why we’re still talking about him 2000 years later.

Messiah is an appearance of God

Moses, David, Joshua, and Abraham all identified themselves as “servant of the LORD” - עבד יהוה - a servant of God himself.

Paul, says he is a servant of Messiah. Is being a servant of Messiah different or lesser than being a servant of YHWH? No.

Messiah, being the fullness of God, is an appearance of Hashem on earth. Paul has no qualms about saying he is a servant of Messiah; being a servant of Messiah is being a servant of Hashem. In identifying himself as a servant of Messiah, Paul affirms Messiah’s divine identity.

This is why Paul threw away all his credentials and social status: to know Messiah is to know God, to serve Messiah is better than status, riches, honor. By lowering himself to servant of Messiah, all the status, honor, praise, respect due to Paul is redirected to the Messiah for God’s glory.

The highest calling

Unlike Islam, the highest calling is not making war on the unbelievers.

Unlike atheism, the highest calling is not “serving yourself”, as John Lennon once narcissistically penned.

The highest calling for people who believe in the God of Israel and the Messiah of Israel is this: serving God and serving other people.

Serving means not always having to be right. Serving means doing things for other people even if you don’t feel like it. Serving means doing charity when there’s no human reward to do so.

This is the ultimate calling for disciples of Yeshua. It’s why the greatest commandments are to love God with everything you have, and love your neighbor as yourself. The nuts and bolts of loving is service. If you love God, you’ll spend your time in life doing things for God’s glory. If you love people, you’ll spend your time in life doing things for those people.

Mishlei says if we do these things, we will “gain favor and a good name
in the eyes of God and man.” (Proverbs 3)
When you die, people will remember and talk about the things you did for people and for God. Nobody will remember you for how much TV you watched, how much partying you did, or any self-serving activity. But they will remember your service to others.

Likewise, when you stand before God, what  reward is there is saying, “Well, I took care of my own needs before everybody else, all the time”?

Gain favor with men and with God: be a servant. Live so that people will miss you when you’re dead. Serve God, serve other people.

The greatest heroes of the Bible did this, and we still talk about them today.

Bob Dylan, John Lennon, and the Apostle Paul’s wicked generation

It’s the 29th day of counting the omer. Each day I post a little something to help me count. Previously I wrote a critique of the “god of the gaps” atheist philosophy. Today, a short word about humanism and the worship of self.

Paul wrote a letter to Rome some 1,950 years ago, and that letter is as prescient as ever. It accurately describes what happens when humanity turns away from God:

God’s wrath is revealed from heaven against humanity’s ungodliness and unrighteousness. In unrighteousness they suppress the truth, because what can be known about God is plain to them—for God has shown it to  them… Claiming to be wise, they became fools. They exchanged the glory of the immortal God for an image in the form of mortal man and birds and four-footed beasts and creeping things.

Romans 1

What happens when humans turn away from God? They worship people and nature. We often read this as old world idol worship, but in some ways it’s still here today. The secular West worships man, worships self, worships nature.

When Bob Dylan turned to God in the 1970s, he wrote “Serve Somebody”:

You might be a rock 'n' roll addict prancing on the stage
You might have drugs at your command, women in a cage
You may be a business man or some high-degree thief
They may call you doctor or they may call you chief

But you're gonna have to serve somebody, yes
Indeed you're gonna have to serve somebody
Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you're gonna have to serve somebody

Dylan’s poignant lyrics of serving somebody – either God or the devil – stirred up a hornet’s nest of opposition. The humanistic John Lennon, himself fully disconnected from God, responded in song with “Serve Yourself”

You say you found Jesus Christ;
He's the only one.
…
Well there's somethin' missing in this God Almighty stew,
And it's your mother, (your mother, don't forget your mother, lad.)
You got to serve yourself,
Ain't nobody gonna do it for you.
You got to serve yourself,
Ain't nobody gonna do it for you.

Lennon’s self-centered narcissism shouldn’t come as a surprise to students of the Bible. The generation that turns away from God will still worship something. It may be idols and false gods, sure, but here in the West, it’s worship of humans, worship of self.

Our political atmosphere is fraught with battles of self-worship:

  • Self-morality: Whether something is right or wrong is now defined by self: if it feels good to me, it’s OK. This translates into real policies like the holocaust of unborn children that is abortion. “My body, my rules.” It places self over morals and ethics.
  • Self-identity: We ignore biology and let people identify as anything they want. If you’re biologically and physiologically a man, you can nonetheless identify as a woman and everyone must agree with you or be called a bigot. This places self over biology.
  • Self-feelings: It it feels good, do it. #lovewins and who am I to judge, amirite? This gives way to policies that place the feelings of self above the good of civilization. Gay marriage doesn’t produce children. No children, no families. No families, no civilization. This feelings-based morality produces the moral cowardice we see in the university today, with its safe spaces, ideological uniformity, leftist monoculture, and opposition to free speech.
  • Self-service: Europe, and increasingly the United States, is moving towards a socialist civilization model, in which other people (by their taxes) provide for all your needs. College, abortions, healthcare, housing. These government entitlements create people who feel entitled (surprise) to what others have. It undermines “You shall not covet”, and perhaps more pressingly, it breaks the golden rule that “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Instead of loving and serving our neighbor, we’re increasingly serving ourselves.

Worship of self is increasingly ubiquitous.

This generation also worships celebrities: They’re the modern equivalent of the Greek pantheon. Our magazines, newspapers, TV shows, news, music, entertainment, and grocery store aisles are lined with the latest rumors and gossip and insider stories about them. And it’s not just secular Hollywood: millions in the West follow, learn from, and support cult-of-personality televangelists.

Lennon’s narcissistic “Serve Yourself” was prophetic. The divine warning found in Paul’s letter remains ever prescient.

AltJT: Test your Jesus Theories in the book of Acts, and what we can learn about Paul’s Torah observance

Author and blogger Lois Tverberg has a great idea: test your “Jesus theories” in the Book of Acts. Let’s call it the Acts Litmus Test for Jesus Theories. AltJT.

AltJT goes like this: your ideas about Jesus are probably colored by your very existence in a foreign culture 2000 years removed from Jesus.

Therefore, to test whether your ideas about Jesus have any merit, you should find evidence of it in the actions of Jesus’ disciples and the early Christian community.

Where can we find evidence of the actions of the early Christian community?

Well, it just so happens we have a book for that: Acts, i.e. The Book of Recorded Actions of the Disciples of Yeshua.

(I love literal names like that. Like Snakes on a Plane, there’s no mistaking its contents.)

Bottom line: your ideas about Jesus should be supported in the Book of Acts. This is the Acts Litmus Test for Jesus Theories, AltJT.

Tverberg elaborates,

bible&candleThere’s no end, it seems, to how people can interpret the words of Jesus. It’s not hard to pluck out a line here and there and read it in some strange new way. How can we know how they actually sounded to his original audience?

I’ve discovered that a great place to look for answers is in the book of Acts. The people there were first-century believers who heard Jesus firsthand. No time had elapsed for his words to be reinterpreted, and his first followers were passionate for living them out. It’s not unreasonable to conclude that what the early believers did (or at least tried to do) was what Jesus taught.

She crystalizes this with an example where popular Christian preacher John MacArthur has a Jesus Theory. Let’s call it the Jesus Killed Judaism Theory. It goes like this:

“He [Jesus] obliterated the sacrificial system because He brought an end to Judaism with all its ceremonies, all its rituals, all its sacrifices, all of its external trappings, the Temple, the Holy of Holies, all of it.”

-John MacArthur

But if we apply the AltJT, we see disciples of Yeshua still partaking in the sacrificial system, meeting in the Temple courtyard, still practicing the feasts, and so on.

If MacArthur’s theory about Jesus obliterating Judaism is true, it was lost on the early Christian community.

MacArthur’s theory fails the AltJT test.

44682314Everyone and their grandma has ideas about Jesus. Your liberal college grad will say Jesus was a peacenik. HuffPo will claim Jesus was ambivalent about homosexuality. The President of the United States’ pastor says Jesus was a social liberator. Thomas Jefferson claimed Jesus was merely a reformer. Some Jews will claim Jesus was a good rabbi.

People are gonna have their opinions about the most influential Jew who ever lived. So remember AltJT to see if those opinions have merit.

AltJT and what it can tell us about Paul, Judaism, and Torah observance

I’d like to extend this AltJT idea to theories about Paul. It’s the same idea: Paul was a very influential figure in the early believing community. Most scholars put some of his letters as the earliest books of the New Testament, within 20 some years of the events of the gospels.

Therefore, if your Paul Theory has any merit (i.e. is not just a bunch of new age-y shis conjured up by pampered 21st century minds), you should see evidence for it in the Book of Acts.

A great example of this is a popular, often-repeated idea is the Paul-As-Jesus-Corrupter Theory. It goes like this:

“Jesus might have been a nice Jewish teacher or whatever, but Paul clearly taught Jews to leave Torah. Therefore, he’s responsible for creating this new religion, Christianity, turning Jesus into a god and making it palatable to gentiles.

The other day, this theory reared its ugly head over at the Rosh Pina blog, where a Jewish person who happened to follow the anti-missionary shysters a little too closely regurgitated this theory to me:

“We are explicitly warned from accepting any prophet or dreamer who would take us away from the Torah (Deuteronomy 13v2-6). That obviously includes Paul and, if some of the words put into his mouth by the gospel writers are what he actually said, eg John 14v6, also jc…”

-gila8, a random guy on the internet claiming Paul invented Christianity and teaches Jews to leave Torah

Paul takes Jews away from Torah is the clear implication.

Rabbi Shmuley Boteach’s recent popular book, Kosher Jesus, also makes this argument: Jesus was a fine Jew, but Paul corrupted it all and turned him into a god, inventing Christianity.

Does this theory pass the AltJT test; do we see in the actions of the early Christian community a belief that Paul was drawing Jews away from Torah?

Yes! We actually do see Jewish followers of Jesus who think Paul is doing that, right in Acts 21. (By the way, just reading the story again in Acts 21-23 is absolutely riveting. I’ve read the story many times, but it’s somehow more powerful as I read it today.)

Back in Acts 21, Jews who objected to this Yeshua-as-Messiah message claimed Paul was teaching Jews to abandon the Torah:

Paul, see how many tens of thousands of Jewish believers, and they are all zealous for the Torah. Now what they have been told about you is that you are teaching all the Jews living among the Goyim to apostatize from Moshe, telling them not to have a b’rit-milah for their sons and not to follow the traditions.

The believing Jews ask Paul to prove he is, in fact, doing the opposite: teaching Torah and practicing it himself:

“What, then, is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. So do what we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow. Take them with you, be purified with them, and pay the expenses connected with having their heads shaved. Then everyone will know that there is nothing to these rumors which they have heard about you; but that, on the contrary, you yourself stay in line and keep the Torah.

“However, in regard to the Goyim who have come to trust in Yeshua, we all joined in writing them a letter with our decision that they should abstain from what had been sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what is strangled and from fornication.”

The next day Sha’ul took the men, purified himself along with them and entered the Temple to give notice of when the period of purification would be finished and the offering would have to be made for each of them.

Observe what’s going on here: unbelieving Jews are claiming Paul teaches Jews to leave Torah.

(This is very much the same situation today, as noted previously.)

The believing Jews assume Paul is not teaching this, and even ask him to prove the rumors false. Paul carries out their request.

Paul is not teaching Jews to abandon the Torah.

The Paul-as-Corruptor-of-Jesus’-Teachings Theory fails the AltJT test: the acts of the early believers don’t align.

Thus, such theories will have to (and they do!) resort to conspiracy theories, where the New Testament is heavily redacted (but not enough to see the “real” Jesus and Paul under the veneer on which they base their theories – oiy!)

Conclusions and 2 anti-Torah theories that fail the AltJT test

If you have a belief about Jesus, a sticky idea in your head about who Jesus of Nazareth is, see if it aligns with the early Christian community, see if it aligns with the actions of the disciples. It’s our best measuring rod.

Notice 2 examples of Jesus or Paul theories fail the AltJT test:

  • The Christian-created Jesus-Obliterated-Torah theory
  • The Jewish-created Paul-Corrupted-Jesus theory, claiming Paul was anti-Torah and contrary to Jesus’ pro-Torah teachings

Both of these fail the test, and both have one thing in common: the supposed obliteration of Torah and Judaism.

I think the reason for that is, Christians and unbelieving Jews have a desire to believe Jesus-faith necessarily results in Torah obliteration.

The Church wants to believe it because it is now fully divorced from Judaism and is, in fact, a religion apart from Israel-faith.

The Synagogue wants to believe that because it can’t allow the Jewish Jesus out of the box, lest the human-erected barrier between Judaism and Christianity diminish.

But in the end, our ideas and theories must be measured against the Scriptures. The book of Acts – detailing the actions of the early disciples and Yeshua community – is perhaps our best testbed.

And the book of Acts shows the early community had not jettisoned Judaism and the practice in the Temple, nor do we see Paul teaching Jews to abandon Torah.

And best yet, there appears to be a growing chorus of scholarship, Jewish and Christian, acknowledging the reality of Jesus and Paul as Torah-upholders, rather than new religion inventors.

Perhaps this is a step in undoing the divorce of Messiah faith from Israel’s religion. Perhaps this is a step towards the restoration of all things.

Also Coming in 2010…

I mentioned in 2009 year’s end round up that I am particularly proud of contributing something of value to the Messianic community through the Greatest Commandments Project and the Weekly Bracha. Contributing stuff like this is great. Far, far better than the endless, fruitless, internet smackdowns between religious people that has become a staple of many religious blogs.

There are 2 additional projects I will be tackling this year, projects that I hope will also contribute some value to the Messianic interweb dwellers:

  • Paul’s Epistles – As a student of Paul’s letters, back in 2006 I started a project that puts the apostle Paul’s letters in blog form, using plain English, based off The Message translation of the Bible. Each chapter from Paul’s letters translate to a single blog post. I’ve got a lot of good feedback from this project, and I want to resurrect it in 2010.

  • Messianic music chords on the open internet – Guitar chords for Messianic music songs is kind of a big deal. It lets folks doing music for Messianic congregations more easily learn Messianic music, whether from classic Messianic pioneers or upcoming artists. Messianic congregations benefit. 

    Last year I posted some of the Messianic guitar chords to the internet. But there are a couple problems: the chords are in Microsoft Word document format, which isn’t universal, and they’re buried in a difficult-to-navigate website (Windows Live SkyDrive).

    To address these issues, this year I will be transferring the guitar chords to the opened internet on Ultimate Guitar. Not only does this make each song linkable, navigable, and universally readable by all web browsers in plain HTML format, but Ultimate Guitar also allows you to instantly transpose an entire song up or down any number of steps, right from your web browser. Brilliant. coolHere’s a sample: Israel’s Hope – Oh Give Thanks

These will be ongoing projects – no schedule – over the next year or two. These will, I hope, contribute something of value to the Messianic movement.

Take care, me bloggies!

Nothing Is Unclean of Itself

Over the week I was listening to a neat podcast from J.K. McKee: Implementation of the Apostolic Decree. It’s about the controversial ruling in Acts 15 on whether gentiles should keep God’s commandments.

I’m a student of Paul’s letters in the New Testament. And one particular bit from Paul has long made me cringe:

I am fully convinced in the Lord Jesus that no food is unclean in itself.

-Paul, in his letter to Rome

Does the above sentence give you pause? It should. Whether you’re an all-grace, no-law kind of Christian, or a stringent Torah-keeper, there are ugly problems with this statement:

  1. It’s written – engraved on tablets of stone, and heard from the mouth of God thundering on Mt. Sinai, that there are, in fact, unclean things. Paul’s little theological musings to the Romans here appears dismissive of a 3500 year-old divine decree from the lips of the Creator. Yikes.

  2. Since Paul seems to be dismissing large swaths of God’s commandments in a single sentence, he would also be contradicting Messiah’s own words. Woops.

  3. When the apostles ruled on Torah & gentiles, their ruling included 3 dietary laws, particularly abstaining from meat sacrificed to idols. With it being, ahem, unclean. Paul’s words here contradict the apostles’ ruling at the Jerusalem Council. Doh!

In other words, and with apologies to the female conservative savior, Paul here is going rogue.

PaulRogue

If you’re a pro-Torah Messianic, this bit from Paul is a problem because he’s contradicting the Torah, which says there are, in fact, unclean things.

If you’re a “Torah is for Jews only” Messianic, this bit is problematic because it contradicts the apostolic ruling on gentiles & Torah.

If you’re a all-grace, law-free Christian, this bit is problematic because it contradicts Yeshua’s words and the ruling in Acts.

I said before I listened to a neat little podcast by J.K. McKee. Yeah. He explains how Paul implements the Jerusalem Council ruling in the Messianic community at Rome. Turns out, Paul may not really be going rogue here. Turns out, this may be another case of mistranslation.

Skip to 1:14 in the podcast. You’ll hear McKee document a linguistics and translation issue:

Almost all bible translations read with the word “unclean” in Romans 14:14.

[…]

The Septuagint [Greek translation of the Torah] renders unclean as the Greek akathartos…ceremonially unclean. But Akathartos does not appear in Romans 14:14, and the rendering of “unclean” is inaccurate.

The Greek word that appears instead is the word koinos. This word means “common”, as in the sense of common ownership of property, ideas, etc. Koinos relates to being of little value, because of being common, ordinary, or profane, and can concern that which ordinary people eat.

John is fair, and documents another side of the issue: he recognizes that koinos has, in the book of Maccabees in the apocrypha, been used to denote unfit foods sacrificed by the Seleucids.

A further study of my own suggests that koinos is used in other places in the New Testament, for example, Acts 2:44:

They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles.All the believers were together and had everything in common [koinos]. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.

If this research is correct, and koinos is indeed used here, then it would appear we have an inconsistency in our English translation. Had the translators been consistent between Acts and Romans, this Acts verse should read:

All the believers were together and had everything unclean.

-Nonsensical, made up translation of Acts 2, translating the Greek ‘koinos’ as unclean, as is done with Romans 14:14.

If koinos is interpreted properly as “common”, Romans 14 suddenly becomes harmonious with the Torah, Messiah, and the apostles:

I am fully convinced in the Lord Jesus that no food is common in itself. But if someone regards something as common, then for him it is common.

-Paul, in his letter to Rome

I suspect this translation was an attempt by translators to fit Paul’s words to what they thought he was saying: that Jesus rendered the Law, in particular the dietary commandments, of no effect.

But a proper study of the language suggests otherwise. It is interesting to stumble on these translation inconsistencies. I wonder how many more there are.

What Galatians Really Says

This past week, an unbelieving Jew-turned-Christian friend of mine, a very visible music artist in the Christian community, announced to the world that Messianics ought to read aloud the book of Galatians at their Passover Seders, drop all forms of Judaism, and be “free from Torah bondage”.

It was a bit discouraging to read this from a fellow Jew and believer in Messiah. Yet more discouraging to know that it is gentile Christians who have led him to this belief. Yet more discouraging still that many Christians are probably rejoicing in such news of Jewish abandonment of Torah and adoption of Christianity and Mother Church.

In response, I told my friend, “I’ll read Galatians until it agrees with Messiah in Matthew 5!”

In the end, though, I’m none too worried about my friend. I think he’s rebelling against his former religion. It’s something that God will work out in him in the proper timing and in His own way. I’m certain of it.

But Galatians itself is another matter. It is a key Pauline letter that Messianics often skip over without properly addressing. Messianic apologist J.K. McKee writes,

For Messianics today, Galatians often proves to be a problem text, as a surface reading of Galatians may appear to be quite negative toward a lifestyle of Torah obedience. As is summarized by most Christians, “Certain Jewish teachers, who professed to be Christians and acknowledged Jesus as Messiah, were obscuring the simplicity of the gospel of free grace with their propaganda. They insisted that to faith in Christ must be added circumcision and obedience to the Mosaic Law” (NIDB, 367). Similarly, much of the Messianic movement has been accused of doing the same thing.

Indeed, when Christians confront me with some Pauline quip from Galatians, my usual response is, “Ok, now fit that in with the rest of Scripture.” Very little addressing of Paul’s actual letter is done.

Later this week, I will write some of my own thoughts on Galatians and Judaism that I’ve re-evaluated over the years. But today, I wanted to post a paper by Dr. Daniel Botkin on the topic of Galatians. It’s a great read and well-grounded. It reflects many of the thoughts that have been on my mind regarding Paul. I hope you fine blog readers can muster the attention span to read it through. Enjoy.

--

The Ghost of Marcion and What Galatians Really Says

by Dr. Daniel Botkin


If a person has a fair amount of exposure to Mainstream Christianity, and a familiarity with the Bible, he may notice that Mainstream Christianity often de-emphasizes the Old Testament and puts a disproportionate amount of emphasis on Paul's epistles. I would hesitate to say that any part of the Scriptures could be overemphasized. However, if we give uncalled-for weight and emphasis to certain parts of the Bible, and neglect what the rest of the Scriptures teach about an issue, we will probably develop an imbalanced view of that particular issue.

By volume, Paul's epistles make up approximately 5% of the Bible. Paul's writings are Holy Scripture, but neither Paul nor the Holy Spirit expected us to give more weight and authority to these epistles than we do to the Old Testament or to the rest of the New Testament.

By putting a disproportionate amount of emphasis on these letters that Paul sent to various churches, we fail to follow the example of Paul, who told the Ephesians, “I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God” (Ac 20:27). By neglecting certain parts of the Bible, we ignore Paul's declaration that “all Scripture is inspired and is useful” (2Tim. 3:16).

Christianity's strong emphasis on Paul's writings and lack of emphasis on so much of the rest of the Bible is puzzling. It is especially puzzling when we consider Peter's warning about Paul's writings: “His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort. As they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction” (2Pet.3: 16)

If it was easy for Paul's contemporaries to misunderstand his epistles, we can be sure that it will be even easier for us to do so, with out limited knowledge of the situations and problems Paul was addressing when he wrote to these various churches. Yet some Christians, perhaps unknowingly, are more intent on following the easy-to-misunderstand teaching contained in Paul's letters than they are on following the plain teaching of the Messiah Jesus contained in the Gospels.

 

What caused the Church to being paying so much attention to Paul?


How did this shift of focus come about? What caused the Church to begin paying so much attention to Paul and so little attention to the Law and the Prophets and other parts of the Bible? To discover the answer to this question, we must go all the way back to the Second Century. After all the original Apostles had died, other people took on the responsibility of continuing the Church’s work. The original Apostles were all Jews, who had been exposed to the teaching of the Law and the Prophets since their childhood. The leaders who replaced them were mostly gentiles from pagan backgrounds, who had comparatively little understanding of the Old Testament Scriptures. We can read about these people in various documents from the Second Century. One Church historian has this to say about these documents:
  "Many stories come in versions so distorted that it is hard to decide whether the principal characters were worthy successors to the apostles, or the devil's own agents. Perhaps their contemporaries were as uncertain as we were."1

There is one character, however, which was undoubtedly one of the devil's own agents: The heretic Marcion, who lived in the second half of the Second Century. Marcion taught that the entire Old Testament should be rejected because it belonged to an evil, inferior God, and not to the God revealed by Jesus of Nazareth.

Marcion was very anti-Jewish; therefore he also rejected any New Testament writings which appeared to speak favorably of "Jewish practices" (i.e., keeping the laws and commandments of the Old Testament). As one writer notes, "Marcion started the trend which has had many followers right up to the present –– if it doesn't suit the theory, excise it as spurious or an interpolation."2

By the time Marcion finished editing the Scriptures, his "Bible" consisted of nothing more than Luke's Gospel (minus the "Jewish" elements) and ten of Paul's epistles. Paul, Marcion taught, was the only apostle who could be trusted. Marcion's anti-Jewish; pro-Paul churches spread throughout the Roman Empire and soon became a major threat to the Messianic faith. According to historians, Marcion's heresy continued to spread until it finally died out sometime around the Fifth Century.

We who claim to believe the Bible must ask ourselves an important question: Did Marcion's anti-Jewish, anti-Old Testament, pro-Paul heresy really die out? Or did the Church simply succumb to it and accommodate it and incorporate it, in a subdued form, into Mainstream Christianity?

Of course our Bible, unlike Marcion's, includes the Law and the Prophets, but how much do we heed their instruction? When we examine the average Christian’s attitude to the Law and the Prophets, it is obvious that the ghost of Marcion is very much alive in the church today.

Although the Church pays lip service to the inspiration and authority of all the Scriptures, its de-emphasis of the Law, the Prophets, and anything "Jewish," and its heavy emphasis on Paul, reveals that the Church today is basically Marcionite in practice. For those who doubt this assertion, let us examine some things that Marcion taught, and we will see that the spirit of Marcion still has a very strong influence of the Church today.

Marcion's most influential writing was a work entitled Antithesis, described as "a highly competent work" which consisted of "contrasted statements arranged to prove the incompatibility of the law and the gospel".3

Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately) there are no known copies of Antithesis in existence. What we know about Marcion's teachings comes mainly from the writing of those who opposed his heresy.


Two 'Gods'?


The one to write the most about Marcion was Tertullian, a church leader who wrote a lengthy work called Against Marcion. Tertullian describes Antithesis as "A work strained into making such a division between the Law and the Gospel as thereby to make two separate gods, opposite to each other, one belonging to one instrument (or, as it is more usual to say, testament), one to the other, and thus lend its patronage to faith in another gospel, that according to Antithesis."4

No real Christian today would admit to believing in two gods, of course. Yet many believers make such a division between Old Testament Law and New Testament grace, that they view the Law as something opposed to grace. The law is seen as something obsolete and of little use to a Christian. Such a warped view of God's Law will carry over into our view of God Himself. If God's Old Testament Law is opposed to God's New Testament grace, we end up with either a schizophrenic God, or Marcion's two gods.
  "Marcion sets up unequal gods." Tertullian writes, "The one a judge, fierce and warlike, the other mild and peaceable, solely kind and supremely good."5

Is this not exactly what many Christians do? They shun the "Old Testament God" because He is too stern and fierce. They focus instead upon the "New Testament God," who, in their minds, does not expect obedience to His laws. Listen to Tertullian's description of Marcion's God, and see if it is not a description of the god presented by the Church today: Marcion's god "displays neither hostility nor wrath." He "neither condemns nor disdains" and "does not punish." "A better god has been discovered," Tertullian sarcastically writes, "one who is neither offended nor angry nor inflicts punishment……..he is merely kind. Of course he forbids you to sin—but only in writing. It lies with you whether you consent to accord him obedience."6

"To what purpose does he lay down commands?" Tertullian asks. "This god is exceptionally dull-witted if he is not offended by the doing of that which he dislikes to see being done."7

We might ask ourselves the same question about the God we worship: To what purpose does He lay down commands? We are certainly not Justified by keeping the Law. We are justified by faith. But after we are justified, what are we to do with God's Commandments? Are we to put them into practice, or are we to disobey them?

One thing that has helped the ghost of Marcion to thrive so well in the Twentieth Century Church, is the popularity of the Scofield Reference Bible. Even Christians who have never seen a Scofield Bible have probably been affected by it indirectly, through preachers and teachers who have been influenced by it.

The Scofield Bible contains many excellent study notes and aids to understanding the Scriptures. Several of Scofield's notes, however, strongly suggest a Marcionite view of Law and Grace. A reader of Scofield's notes is left with the impression that Law and Grace are mutually exclusive.

Scofield's anti-law bias has fed and nurtured and sustained the tares of nomophobia (fear of the Law) that Marcion sowed in the Church nineteen centuries ago. As the end of the age approaches, God is sending forth His messengers to uproot these tares, so His wheat can mature and bring forth the fruit of obedience to God's Laws. 

 

Spirit of Lawlessness


A spirit of lawlessness has been hanging over the Church for most of its history. Some Christians have been influenced by it more than others have, of course. Paul saw it beginning in his lifetime. Second Thessalonians speaks about “The secret power of lawlessness” Which was “already at work” when Paul wrote to the Thessalonians.

Paul told the Thessalonians that before the Messiah returned, there would be a “falling away” (apostasy, “departure from truth”). This departure from the truth would then open the door for something called “The man of lawlessness” to come forth. This “coming of the lawless one” would be accompanied by “all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders” which would “deceive those who are perishing.”

“They perish because they refused to love the truth and be saved,” Paul writes. “For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie.” In preparation for the Return of the Messiah, God is also sending powerful revelation to graciously expose the ancient lie, so that those who love the truth can depart from error and be freed from the bewitching influence of the spirit of lawlessness.

In 1989, Ted Turner of CNN declared the Ten Commandments obsolete and offered his own “Ten Voluntary Initiatives” as an alternative to God’s outdated laws. No one should take Turner seriously, of course, but he did make one comment that deserves our attention. “Nobody around likes to be commanded,” he said. “Commandments are out.”8

Christians may scoff at Turner’s idea of replacing God’s Laws with human ideas, yet is this not the very thing the Church has done with some of God’s Commandments? We have replaced the 24-hour, seventh-day Sabbath with an hour or two of Sunday morning worship; we have replaced the Biblical holy days with holidays of pagan origin; we have replaced God’s dietary guidelines with our own ideas about what we should eat.

After a person has been forgiven and justified by faith, where should he look for moral instruction? Should he look to God’s Commandments to tell him how to live the Christian life, or should he ignore God’s Commandments and live according to man’s suggestions? Even Scofield, in spite of all his anti-law bias and nomophobia, concedes that the Old Testament commandments “are used in the distinctively Christian Scriptures as an instruction in righteousness.”9

 

Against Marcion


In Against Marcion, Tertullian accuses Marcion and his followers of “forbidding what (God) commands and commanding what He forbids.”10

The ghost of Marcion continues to do this in the Church today. Mainstream Christianity has criticized believers for keeping the seventh-day Sabbath, for celebrating the Biblical holy days, for practicing the dietary law, and for refusing to shave their beards—things that God has commanded. And, like Marcion, Mainstream Christianity often commands what God forbids: “Forget the Sabbath. Ignore the holy days and dietary laws. And shave that beard, so you will look like a Christian!” (Many Bible colleges and seminaries command their students to shave their beard, in spite of God’s command in Lev. 19:27).

Marcion, like many church leaders today, misused the words of Jesus and the words of Paul to support this nomophobic, anti-Jewish, pro-Paul gospel. Tertullian rightly points out that Jesus’ verbal attacks on the teachers of the Law were not aimed at the Law itself, but at man’s perversion and misuse of God’s Law. “He is not criticizing the burdens of the law,” Tertullian writes. The burdens Jesus criticized were, according to Tertullian, “those which they piled on of their own, teaching for precepts the doctrines of men.”11

Tertullian shows the importance Jesus attached to keeping the commandments when he writes about the rich young ruler who approached Jesus: “So when he is asked by that certain man, “Good “Teacher, what shall I do to obtain possession of eternal life?”, he inquired whether he knew –which means, was keeping, the Creator’s Commandments….Come now, Marcion, and all you companions in the misery and sharers in the offensiveness of that heretic, what will you be bold enough to say? Did Christ here rescind those former commands….?12

Tertullian opposes Marcion’s misuse of Paul’s writings by pointing out the “Jewishness” of Paul’s faith, and then asking, “What had (Paul) still to do with Jewish custom, if he was the destroyer of Judaism?”13

He also refers to Romans 7:7, to combat Marcion’s hatred of the Law: “What shall we say then? That the law is sin? God forbid.”Shame on you, Marcion. God forbid: the apostle expresses abhorrence of complaint against the law…Yet he adds even more: “The Law is holy, and its commandment is just, and good.”14 As Tertullian points out later, “you cannot make a promoter of the law into an opponent of it.”15

Unfortunately, the Church ignored Paul’s positive statements about the Law and Jesus’ warning about the necessity of continuing to practice and teach the Old Testament commandments. (See Matt. 5:17-19)

The Epistle of Barnabas, an influential letter written in the Second Century, indicates the general direction the church was heading in its attitude to the Old Testament. “The main theme of Barnabas,” writes one church historian, “is a spiritualization of the Mosaic Law. The writer holds that the Jews were wrong to take the Old Testament literally.”16

Everything in the Old Testament was allegorized to give it a Christian meaning. Even the commandments were taken figuratively, because, according to Barnabas, “The Law of Moses had never been meant to be taken literally.”17

Even the dietary restrictions were said to represent not actual food, but various kinds of sinful habits.

Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho also shows early Christianity’s negative attitude toward the Law. Trypho the Jew expresses bewilderment when he tells Justin, “(You Christians) spurn the commands…and then try to convince us (Torah-observant Jews) that you know God, when you fail to do those things that every God-fearing person would do. If, therefore, you can give a satisfactory reply to these charges and can show us on what you place your hopes, even though you refuse to obey the Law, we will listen to you most willingly, and then we can go on and examine in the same manner our other differences.”18

Justin replies by saying that the Law is “obsolete,” “abrogated,” “voided,” and tells Trypho, “You understand all in a carnal way.”19

Not all followers of the Messiah were influenced by the nomophobic, anti-Old Testament, pro-Paul gospel of Marcion. There is historical evidence of several groups of believers who practiced the Law as an expression of their faith in Yeshua (Jesus) as the Messiah.

After Trypho asks Justin about the possibility of believing in Yeshua as the Messiah and continuing to observe the commandments, Justin writes his reply: “Yes, Trypho, “I conceded, there are some Christians who…desire to observe as many of the Mosaic precepts as possible—precepts which we think were instituted because of your hardness of heart—while at the same time they place their hope in Christ…”20 Justin obviously disagreed with these Law-keeping Messianic believers, but he does acknowledge their existence.

The best-known of these groups who believed in Yeshua and practiced the Torah were the Nazarenes and the Ebionites. There were other groups, more obscure and far less orthodox, such as the Elchasaites and the Pseudoclementines.21

Some doctrinal errors in some of these predominately Jewish groups probably contributed to the decision of the Mainstream, Gentile Church to adopt Marcion’s anti-Law, anti-Jewish attitude. One writer notes that “Jewish Christianity in various forms continued as a disturbing factor until almost the Fifth Century.”22

It is interesting that this is the same time that Marcion’s heresy supposedly “died out.” Once Marcion’s error (in a modified, subdued form) had been fully assimilated into the Mainstream Church, “Jewish Christianity” was no longer a “disturbing factor” because the Law-keeping Christians were greatly outnumbered by those who had adopted Marcion’s attitude toward the Law. The number of those who upheld both the Torah and the Messiah (see Rev. 12:17 & 14:12) was so insignificant by the Fifth Century that the Mainstream Church no longer considered them a threat. They could now be written off as a fringe group, and conveniently ignored. Though they were few in number compared to the now-Marcion-ized Mainstream Church, these groups who upheld both the Torah and the Messiah continued to exist until at least as late as the Tenth Century.23

While Mainstream Christianity, influenced by Marcion, de-emphasized the law and over-emphasized Paul, groups such as the Ebionites totally rejected Paul, viewing him as an apostate and enemy of the Law. Both of these extremes are distortions of true, Biblical faith in the Messiah.

The solution is not to reject either Paul or the Law; the solution is to view Paul’s writings in a way that will allow them to harmonize with what the rest of the Bible says about the Law.

How should a disciple of Yeshua / Jesus view Paul’s epistles? For those who desire to be faithful and to live “by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God, “ seven guidelines are listed below. The Bible student should keep these guidelines in mind when reading Paul’s writings.

 

Over-All Biblical Context


Paul’s epistles, like any other part of Scripture, must be viewed in the light of the entire Bible. This means that when we are dealing with the Law, we must not focus in on a few statements Paul made, and ignore everything else the Bible says about God’s Law. As pointed out earlier, Paul’s writings make up approximately 5% of the Bible. Paul’s writings must be understood in a way that will make them compatible with what the other 95% of the Bible says. In other words, let the other 95% of the Bible interpret the 5% that Paul wrote.

It is important to remember that for many years, the Old Testament was the only Bible the Early Church had. The New Testament writings were gradually accepted into the canon of the Scriptures. It was not until about the middle of the Second Century that the term “The Scriptures” referred to the New Testament as well as the Old Testament.24 Therefore, when New Testament writers mention “The scriptures” or “The commandments,” they are referring to the Old Testament.

Historical Context


The New Jerusalem Bible, in its “Introduction to Paul,” makes this statement: “It is important to remember that Paul’s letters were not meant as theological treatises: most of them represent his response to a particular situation in a particular church….Paul’s letters do not give any systematic and exhaustive exposition of his teachings; they presuppose the oral teaching which preceded them, and enlarge and comment only upon certain points of that.”25

Because Paul often wrote to correct particular problems in particular churches, we must have some knowledge of the situation Paul was addressing if we are to understand his writings. Sometimes the problem can be inferred from Paul’s remarks, but often we are left with little or no knowledge of the situations Paul was dealing with.

Theologians often try to reconstruct the historical backgrounds of the epistles and make educated guesses about the problems Paul was addressing. This can be a noble effort, if it is done in a sincere attempt to come to a clearer understanding of what Paul taught. Unfortunately, many people come to an understanding of Paul that contradicts what the rest of the Bible teaches, either by incorrectly reconstructing the historical background, or by ignoring it altogether.

 

Peter's Warning


It is important to bear in mind Peter’s warning that Paul’s letters are not easy to understand: “His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position” (2Pet.3:16f).

Those with little or no knowledge of the Old Testament Scriptures are especially apt to misinterpret Paul’s writing to their own ruin. Notice, it is not the Law-keeping disciples of Yeshua who distort Paul’s epistles—it is “lawless men” that Peter warns us about.

 

Jesus' Warning


Early in His ministry, the Messiah spoke this warning to His followers: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:17-19).

Our Master’s warning seems plain and simple enough to understand, yet many Christians mistakenly believe that by fulfilling the Law, He thereby abolished it. This is exactly what He is warning us not to think! “I have come to fulfill the Law, “: He says, “but do not even think that by fulfilling it, I am thereby abolishing it.”

Sometimes it is easier for people outside Mainstream Christianity to see the blindness of Christians in this area. The Jewish Encyclopedia quotes Jesus’ warning of Matt. 5:17, and then makes this bold statement: “The rejection of the Law by Christianity, therefore, was a departure from its Christ.”26

In an article with the catchy title, “Jesus Was Not a Christian,” the writer points out that “Jesus certainly wouldn’t have been recognized as a Christian throughout his entire life. “He scrupulously adhered to the Law of Moses” and “enjoined his disciples to keep every detail of the Torah.”27

A story in the New York Yiddish Forward tells of a reporter’s encounter with an old Hasidic Jew in Paris years ago. This Jew had a fervent faith in Jesus as the Messiah. When the reporter asked him about the compatibility of Orthodox Judaism and belief in Jesus, the old man replied, “Who then should believe in Him, the gentiles?” The reporter describes the old man’s remarks this way:

“He said that only Jews can truly accept belief in Jesus as the Messiah and regard him as the last prophet, for gentiles can never accept such a lofty faith. It is next to impossible for them to walk in His ways, for first of all, Yeshua, as he called Him, commanded to observe all the Jewish laws, the entire Torah, and gentiles do not even know this.”28

Of course it is not impossible for gentiles to accept and practice such a lofty faith. The question is, will they do it? Or will they continue to cling to the lies of Marcion?

 

Paul's Positive Statements About the Law


Many Christians overlook or choose to ignore the positive things Paul said about the Law. He writes, for example, “The Law is holy, and the Commandment is holy, righteous and good” (Rom. 7:12). Paul says, “For in my inner being I delight in God’s law” and “I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s Law” (Rom. 7:22,25).

He tells Timothy, “We know that the Law is good if one uses it properly” (ITim. 1:8). To the Corinthians he writes, “Keeping God’s Commandments is what counts” (ICor.7:19). Even when explaining the righteousness that comes by faith, Paul is careful to make sure his readers know that their faith does not give them an excuse to ignore God’s Law: “Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the Law” (Rom.3:31).

Paul's Negative Statements About the Law


Paul, in his negative statements about the Law, was not criticizing the Law itself, but man’s misuse of the Law. The Law was meant to be a moral guide for a people already justified by faith, but some people in Paul’s day were depending on their Law-keeping as the means of their justification before God. What Paul criticized was not Law-keeping itself, but making Law-keeping the basis of one’s justification before God.

Between the Babylonian Captivity and the time of the Messiah, Israel developed an erroneous understanding of the Law’s purpose. The Jews who first returned from Babylon knew that their exile had been the result of the breaking of God’s Laws; therefore, they put a heavy emphasis on the Law when they returned to their homeland. Unfortunately, this new emphasis eventually developed a theology that caused some people to erroneously view Law-keeping, rather than faith, as the key to their justification. Paul’s negative statements about the Law were simply his attempts to correct this erroneous use of the Law.

One writer puts it this way: “Paul, in his epistles, affirms the Law, yet condemns the wrong emphasis men place upon it. In this sense he is turning believers back to the original intent of the law, it being a rule for godly living for those who are already redeemed. He rejects the later shift towards making it a means of salvation.”29

Another author says basically the same thing when he writes, “Paul rejects the law as a “Method of Salvation” but upholds it as a “Standard for Christian Conduct.”30

To dispel these false accusations, the elders of Jerusalem had Paul go with four men who had taken a vow (probably a Nazarite vow), telling Paul that in this way “all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also work orderly, keeping the Law” (Acts 28:17).

To his Jewish accusers from Jerusalem, Paul said, “I have committed No Offense, either against the Law of the Jews or against The temple”(Acts 25:8). To the Jews in Rome, he repeated the same testimony: “Brethren, though I had done nothing against our people, or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered prisoner into the hands of the Romans” (Acts 28:17).

Paul's Example

It is very clear that Paul continued to keep the Law after he met the Messiah. The only thing that changed was Paul’s reason for keeping the Law. Before, he had kept it in an effort to be justified before God. After meeting the Messiah, he found the justification he had sought through his Law-keeping. Paul was justified through faith, and the Law was internalized, “written upon the heart,” as Jeremiah prophesied it would be (31:31-34). Now he desired to obey God’s commandments because of the inward impulse of his new nature. His obedience was no longer the result of an external compulsion to justify himself before God by Law-keeping. Thus, he was free to obey “in the way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code: (Rom.7:6).

By keeping the Law, in the right way and for the right reasons, Paul left an example for all disciples to follow, whether Jew or non-Jew. Some people seem to think that only Jewish believers were expected to continue practicing Torah. The so-called “Great Commission” rules out this possibility. When Jesus instructed His Jewish disciples to go to “all nations (Gentiles),” He told them to teach the Gentile nations “to obey everything I have commanded you (My Jewish Disciples)” (Matt.28:18ff). He commanded His Jewish disciples to obey the Torah (Matt 5:17-19 & 23:1-2), and they were to teach the Gentiles to do it.

The key to godly living is not to ignore the Law and elevate Paul, as Marcion did. Nor is the solution to overemphasize the Law and reject Paul, as the Ebionites and others did. The solution is to do what Paul said to do: “Follow my example, as I follow the example of the Messiah” (Icor.11:1). If we truly follow Paul’s example, as he followed the example of Messiah, we will begin to practice Old Testament commands that the Church has ignored or changed.

A.W. Tozer wrote, “Probably no other portion of the Scriptures can compare with the Pauline epistles when it comes to making artificial saints.”31 Let us avoid artificial sainthood by keeping in mind the above-mentioned seven guidelines for understanding Paul’s epistles.

As we let the naked truth of Holy Scripture renew our minds and change our thinking, the sunlight of God’s Word will dispel the mist of the ghost of Marcion. We will find ourselves transformed as the fog lifts, and as we see the Law as God always meant it to be seen: as something positive, holy, and good, “if one uses it properly” (1Tim.1:8).

Let those who wish to whole-heartedly follow the Messiah begin to learn the commandments, practice them, and teach them to others, for ”whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt. 5:19). As we banish the ghost of Marcion, the “spirit of lawlessness,” from our theology, we will see the commandments not as a yoke of bondage, but as a moral guide by which we can joyfully live a life that is pleasing to the Heavenly Father. Then we will be able to rejoice in God’s commandments as the psalmist did:

“I will praise You with an upright heart as I learn your righteous laws…I rejoice in following Your statutes as one rejoices in great riches…I have chosen the way of truth; I have set my heart on Your laws. I hold fast to Your statutes, O Lord; do not let me be put to shame. I run in the path Of Your commands, for You have set my heart free…I will always Obey Your law, forever and ever. I will walk about in freedom, for I Sought out Your precepts…Great peace have they who love Your Law, and nothing can make them stumble” (Ps.119:7,14,30-32, 44f,165).

References
  1. Smith, M.A. From Christ to Constantine (London: Intervarsity Press, 1971), p. 14.
  2. Ibid., p.53.
  3. Tertullian, Against Marcion, trans. And ed. Ernest Evans (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972), p. xv.
  4. Tertullian, IV.1.
  5. Ibid.,I.6
  6. Ibid.,I.26f
  7. Ibid.
  8. Turner''s Commandments, ""Peoria Journal Star, 27 Oct., 1989, section D, p.22.
  9. The Scofield Reference Bible, ed. C.I.Scofield (New York: Oxford University Press, 1917), p.1245.
  10. Tertullian, IV.1.
  11. Ibid., IV.27
  12. Ibid., IV.36.
  13. Ibid., V.5.
  14. Ibid., V.14.
  15. Ibid., V.17.
  16. Smith, p.39
  17. Eerdman''s Handbook to the History of Christianity, ed. Tim Dowley (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1977), p.102.
  18. Justin Martyr, Dialogue With Trypho, ch.10.
  19. Ibid., ch.11, 14
  20. Ibid., ch.47.
  21. Austin, Bill R. Austin''s Topical History of Christianity (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 1983) p.72f.
  22. Ibid., p.73.
  23. Flusser, David Jewish Sources in Early Christianity (New York: Adama Books, 1987), p
    Guidelines How to View Paul
  24. Smith, p. 63.
    Guidelines How to View Paul
  25. The New Jerusalem Bible, ed. Henry Wansbrough (New York: Doubleday and Co.,1985), p.1852f.
    Guidelines How to View Paul
  26. The Jewish Encyclopedia, ed. Isidore Singer New York and London: Funk and Wagnalls, 1903), Vol.V.,p.52.
  27. John Murray Smoot, Jesus Was Not a Christian, “A Way in the Wilderness, ed. M.G. Einspruch (Baltimore: The Lederer Foundation, 1981), p.28
  28. J. Feldman, “Yozel’s Hasid, “The Ox, the Ass, the Oyster, ed. Henry and Marie Einspruch (Baltimore: The Lederer Foundation, 1975), p.74.
    Guidelines How to View Paul
  29. Michael Schiffman, “A Pauline Understanding of the Place of the Law for New Covenant Believers, “The Messianic Outreach, 7:3 Spring 1988, p.9.
  30. Bacchiocchi, Samuele The Sabbath in the New Testament (Berrien Springs, MI: University Printers, 1985), p.101.
  31. Gems From Tozer (England: Send the Light Trust, 1969), p.18

Conclusions on Former Gentiles

You, a former gentile who believes in Messiah, are no longer foreign to the covenants God made with Israel. You used to be alienated from Israel, now you’re not. No longer an alien/foreigner, but a first-class member of God’s people.

The other week, we critically dissected the first part of Ephesians 2, where Paul makes this claim of gentiles-as-first class citizens, in God’s kingdom, no longer foreigners to Israel and the covenants God made with his people; now part of the commonwealth of Israel.

Enjoy your first class seat!

114602488820060426 Air Canada Solar Seat

Since then, we’ve had a lot of vehement debate.

The initial post generated a 15 responses as folks interpreted Paul’s letter in light of their own theologies.

A week later as we discussed this in more detail, wondering just exactly what Paul meant by this mutation:

Initial state:

  • Apart from God
  • Alienated from Israel
  • Strangers to the covenants God made with Israel

New state:

  • Brought near to God through Messiah
  • Joined to the commonwealth of Israel
  • Partakers of God’s covenants with Israel

Beware the mutant gentiles!  

That means gentiles have been brought near to God through Messiah, are no longer aliens to Israel, and are no longer strangers to the covenants God made with Israel.

That's some pretty deep theology there.

We finally looked at the last half of Ephesians 2. Sweet goodness, did you guys have a lot to say on this! As of this writing, we’ve have 49 comments of debate discussing this last bit where Paul tells us a mystery: this metamorphosis has come because Messiah broke down the wall dividing Jew and gentile. By abolishing the Torah on the cross.

Yeah, about that last part. As much as some Christians want that to be true, it just doesn’t pan out, as we’ll shortly see.

Let’s get out our scalpel and finish this sucker! Here is the last bit of Ephesians 2: it’s nice and short, but contains some real doozies!

He is our peace, who made both one.

He broke down the middle wall, the enmity in his flesh, the law of the commands in ordinances having done away, that the two he might create in himself into one new man, making peace, to reconcile both in one body to God through the cross, having slain the enmity in it.

He came and proclaimed good news – peace to you – both far off and near, because through him we have the access – we both – in one Spirit unto the Father.

Then, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens of the house of God, being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Yeshua Messiah himself being chief corner-[stone], in whom all the building fitly framed together increases to an holy sanctuary in the Lord, in whom also you are built together, for a home of God in the Spirit.

-Paul, in his letter to Ephesus

Whew. Let’s dissect this and see what comes out.

He is our peace, who made both one.

Who’s he talking about when he says “both”? Because we’ve studied this thing in context, we know he’s talking about Israel and the gentiles.

Ok, so to paraphrase, here’s conclusion #1: “Messiah is our peace who made Israel and the gentiles as one.”

Paul explains this a bit:

He broke down the middle wall, the enmity in his flesh, the law of the commands in ordinances having done away, that the two he might create in himself into one new man, making peace, to reconcile both in one body to God through the cross, having slain the enmity in it.

He broke down the wall that divided us. Ok, good good good. Don’t know what the enmity in his flesh is. Skipping… He did away with the enmity, which is the Torah, slaying it on the cross. Good good…erhm, wait, WHAT?! 

Many Christians interpret this verse in this way: “Jesus Christ slew the Torah on the cross.”

Slew. To slay. That means, “destroy with violence”.

JesusRifle (3) = Broken Law

Is that how you interpret this, dear blog reader?

Here Paul just finished saying how gentiles are no longer foreigners to Israel and the covenants (including the Mosaic covenant!). But then Paul supposedly says, “Oh, and Messiah destroyed the covenants by slaying them on the cross.”

Folks, it ain’t addin’ up! </southern drawl>

Joking aside, there’s a deeply-rooted flaw with such an interpretation. If Paul is saying what some wish him to be saying, then Paul is contrary to Messiah, contrary to the prophets, contrary to the Psalms, contrary to pretty much all of Scripture. If Paul is saying, “Jesus violently destroyed and abolished the Torah on the cross”, then Paul’s writings would have the need to be violently ripped from the New Testament!

Fortunately, Paul is not saying that.

Fortunately, Paul is in alignment with Messiah.

And we don’t have to perform any airy spiritual acrobatics to interpret in such a way that Messiand and Paul are not at odds with each other.

After discussing this verse with you fine blog readers and hearing your own interpretations, my own interpretation comes to this, conclusion #2:

As Israel was kept separate from the nations through Torah, hostility abounded. Messiah destroyed the hostility-wall.

Simple.

And no Scriptural acrobatics required.

acrobatics

So Messiah destroyed the hostility between Jew and gentile, Israel and the nations. Ok, how exactly is that accomplished? Since Torah is still here (as Messiah said, “until heaven and earth pass away”), how is it that there’s no hostility between Jew and gentile?

Well, truth be told, there is still hostility. I sense it even on this blog, in the comments. I sense it in the religion of Messianic Judaism.

But if we are walking perfectly with Messiah, that hostility would not exist. And this is Paul’s next point:

He came and proclaimed good news – peace to you – both far off and near, because through him we have the access – we both – in one Spirit unto the Father.

This hostility is broken down because we both have equal access to God through Messiah. If I could paraphrase, I’d say, “Messiah brought good news to both Israel and the gentiles: through Him, both have access to God.”

Makes sense.

And Paul ties it all together – why was he talking about “former gentiles” before? How does this fit?

Therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens of the house of God, being built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Yeshua Messiah himself being chief corner-[stone], in whom all the building framed together increases to an holy sanctuary in the Lord, in whom also you are built together, for a home of God in the Spirit.

Gentiles are no longer strangers to the things of God: Israel or the covenants with Israel. Instead, you’re fellow-citizens with Israel. You’re built on Messiah, the prophets, the apostles. You’re the Temple. 

Conclusion 

To summarize and paraphrase, this is what Ephesians 2 is all about:

You gentiles used to follow the ways of the world, sinning without remorse. Rebels against God. You were dead. You were separate from Israel. A complete foreigner to all of the covenants God made with His people Israel --no Torah, no God, no life!

But God loved all humanity; he saved us by giving Messiah. He did it to show how great He is. It's all Him, we sure didn't warrant it!

Now even gentiles can be set right with God.

In doing this, Messiah became that shalom that makes Jew and gentile as one.

Because of the Torah, there was hostility between Israel and the gentiles. But He destroyed this hostility by bringing peace to both Jew and gentile, giving both of us access to God.

Because of that, you gentiles are fellow citizens with Israel in God’s house, you each have become a Temple to house God’s Spirit, a Temple built on the prophets and the apostles, with Messiah himself as the bedrock.

-My summarized, simplified interpretation of Ephesians 2

After weeks of Scriptural study and having heard the opinions and interpretations of you fine blog readers, this is the conclusion I’ve drawn.

One thing I was hoping this study would do is give us a better idea of how Torah applies to gentiles, and whether gentiles become Jews.

It’s shed a little light, I think:

  • Gentiles do not magically change lineage to become Jews. Gentiles are still non-Jews, the nations.
  • Gentiles are no longer foreigners to the any of God’s covenants, including the Torah.
  • Gentiles are fellow citizens of the commonwealth of Israel

Does that mean Torah applies to gentiles?

If you are not a foreigner, but a fellow citizen of the commonwealth of Israel, Torah applies to even the gentiles who were once far off but now are near.

It makes sense, doesn’t it? If God wants even the previously-unclean gentiles to be clean, wouldn’t He apply the same standard of cleanliness to both Jew and gentile?

He told Israel how to be holy in a day-to-day life using very practical and concise commandments about what’s right and what’s wrong. Christian blog reader, you may be surprised to know these day-to-day instructions exist in the first half of your Bible.

There exists but one standard of right and wrong for God’s people, whether native born Israelites or you former gentiles who are fellow citizens, joined to the commonwealth of Israel, no longer foreigners to God’s covenants with Israel. That standard is Torah, embodied by Messiah who showed us how to live. Messiah made Jew and gentile as equals before God not by destroying the Torah, but by giving both Jews and gentiles access to God through himself.

Custom comments