Galatians 5:1-4 tells me that if I try to justify myself THROUGH the 'law' I am fallen from grace, rather, I am to stand fast in the 'liberty' of Christ Jesus.
From what I see, the Apostle Paul wrote way too much about Grace versus Law for me to accept he spent 3 years attempting to 'perfect' himself in order to be able to join what you are purporting to be the 'true church' of Christ
Another thought too...whether it was the jailer and his household who received salvation or Cornelius and his family, it was through baptism and confession and was somewhat instantaneous, not some sort of doctrinal and practical apprenticeship ( unless I've mistaken what you are proposing ?) No-one really denies Jesus initially 'came to his own', Israel, however, 'his own' rejected him and thereby paved 'the way' for the Gentiles to receive him and everything that entails.
Galatians 5:1-4 tells me that if I try to justify myself THROUGH the 'law' I am fallen from grace, rather, I am to stand fast in the 'liberty' of Christ Jesus.
From what I see, the Apostle Paul wrote way too much about Grace versus Law for me to accept he spent 3 years attempting to 'perfect' himself in order to be able to join what you are purporting to be the 'true church' of Christ
Galatians 4:21-5:6
In prompting this study I will begin with Gal. 5:2:
Behold, I Paul say to you, that if you be circumcised,
Christ shall profit you nothing.
Gal. 5:2 KJV
At first glance one might think after reading this verse that this one verse disproves the entire case made throughout the book you are now reading. But the key is that we must take the verse in context. One basic rule of hermeneutics is to ask yourself "who is speaking?" and "who is being spoken to?" Now we know that Paul is the speaker, but who is the "you" in Gal. 5:2? Is it the Galatians in general? Is it all mankind? Is it the modern reader? The answer to all of these questions is "no". If we look up just a little bit in Paul's letter here we will see that Gal. 5:2 is the summary of an argument that he initiates in Gal. 4:21 and which he illustrates in Gal. 4:22-31. Gal. 4:21 tells us exactly who the "you" in 5:2 is. He writes:
Tell me, you that desire to be under the law,
do you not hear the law?
Gal. 4:21
Note that "you" is defined in 4:21 as "you that desire to be under the law" Thus Gal. 5:2 should be understood to mean:
Behold, I Paul say
to you, [that desire to be under the law]
that if you be circumcised,
Christ shall profit you nothing
What does the phrase "Under the Law" mean?
Much of the confusion about Paul's teachings on the Torah involves two scripture phrases, which appear in the New Testament only in Paul's writings (in Rom. Gal. & 1Cor.). These two phrases are "works of the law" and "under the law", each of which appears 10 times in the Scriptures.
The first of these phrases, "works of the law", is best understood through its usage in Gal. 2:16. Here Paul writes:
knowing that a man is not justified by works of the law but by faith in Yeshua the Messiah,
even we have believed in Messiah Yeshua,
that we might be justified by faith in Messiah
and not by the works of the law;
for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.
Paul uses this phrase to describe a false method of justification which is diametrically opposed to "faith in the Messiah". To Paul "works of the law" is not an obsolete Old Testament system, but a heresy that has never been true.
The term "works of the Torah" has shown up as a technical theological term used in a document in the Dead Sea Scrolls called MMT which says:
Now we have written to you some of the
works of the law, those which we determined
would be beneficial for you...
And it will be reckoned to you as righteousness,
in that you have done what is right and good before Him...
(4QMMT (4Q394-399) Section C lines 26b-31)
The second of these phrases is "under the law". This phrase may best be understood from its usage in Rom. 6:14, "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under the law but under grace." Paul, therefore, sees "under grace" and "under the law" as diametrically opposed, one cannot be both. The truth is that since we have always been under grace (see Gen. 6:8; Ex. 33:12, 17; Judges 6:17f; Jer. 31:2) we have never been "under the law". This is because the Torah was created for man, man was not created for the Torah (see Mk. 2:27). "Under the law" then, is not an obsolete Old Testament system, but a false teaching, which was never true.
There can be no doubt that Paul sees "works of the law" and "under the law" as categorically bad, yet Paul calls the Torah itself "holy, just and good" (Rom. 7:12), certainly Paul does not use these phrases to refer to the Torah itself.
The phrase "under the law" therefore, does not refer to the Torah itself but to a false teaching that was never true. So Paul is telling these people who are ready to apostatize and seek salvation through the false "under the law" doctrine, that their circumcisions will profit them nothing. Following the context then the rest of Gal. 5 is addressed to the "you that desire to be under the law" of 4:21.
Now let us examine the midrash Paul gives in Gal. 4:22-31. Remember now, we know from Gal. 4:21 that Paul is going to be illustrating a contrast between the Torah and the "under the law" teaching. The parable may be illustrated in a chart as follows:
The Torah
Abraham’s son by the freewoman(Isaac) (Gal. 4:22)
Born by promise(Gal. 4:23)
Jerusalem which is above which is free,the mother of us all. [sarah](Gal. 4:26)
the liberty where with Messiah has made us free(Gal. 5:1)
Under the Law
Abraham’s son by the bondwoman(Ishmael) (Gal. 4:22)
Born after the flesh (Gal. 4:23)
from mount Sinai genders to bondage Hagar
entangled again with the yoke of bondage"(Gal. 5:1)
The Torah is freedom. False teachings such as the ANOMOS teaching, the "works of the law" teaching and the "under the law" teaching bring only bondage.
Another thought too...whether it was the jailer and his household who received salvation or Cornelius and his family, it was through baptism and confession and was somewhat instantaneous, not some sort of doctrinal and practical apprenticeship ( unless I've mistaken what you are proposing ?) No-one really denies Jesus initially 'came to his own', Israel, however, 'his own' rejected him and thereby paved 'the way' for the Gentiles to receive him and everything that entails.
Many have asked "Why have the Jews rejected Jesus?"… well let me make this clear, the only "Jesus" that most Jewish people have ever been exposed to is the "Jesus" that supposedly came to "free them from the bondage of the Law". Yes, they have rejected this Torahless Jesus, and rightly so. But most of them have never been exposed to the real Yeshua.
In coming years you will see many Jewish people embracing Yeshua as the Messiah. But the Yeshua that they accept will be the real Yeshua and not the Torahless "Jesus" that Christendom has adopted from pagan sources. The Jewish people know that an anti-Torah Messiah is no Messiah at all, they know better than to accept the rank paganism attached to Gentile Christianity.
The truth is that a great number of Orthodox Jews (even Rabbis) already know that Yeshua is the true and only Messiah, some of them have even confided this to me. At present they have no intention of disclosing this fact because they believe it would unite them with an anti-Torah Christianity which is overflowing with pagan customs and
practices, and a disdain for the Torah which is seen as "bondage".
The Jewish people will also come to realize that the books known as the "New Testament" (More correctly called the Ketuvim Netzarim, the "Writings of the Nazarenes") in their original Hebrew and Aramaic rather than their Greek translations, are as much a "Jewish Book" as the Tanak ("Old Testament")
It is not Christianity that the Jewish people will ultimately embrace, it is the ancient Nazarene sect of Judaism.
Read Romans 11, Paul says that if you thought wild branches being grafted in was a blessing to the world, wait until you see natural branches grafted into their own olive tree!
(Rom. 11:11-12, 15, 23-24)
Don't get me wrong, I do NOT teach that Torah observance earns salvation, absolutely not!
The following is taken from our statement of faith:
III. MESSIAH
We believe that Y'shua HaMashiach has come and with great joy we anticipate his return, and even though he may delay, nevertheless we endeavor to think about his return every day. We believe that the Messiah is the Word made flesh. We believe he was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life in accordance with the Torah, performed miracles, was crucified for the atonement of his people in accordance with the Scriptures, was bodily resurrected on the third day. ascended to heaven and currently sits at the right hand of YHWH. He will return at the end of this age to usher in the Kingdom of Elohim on earth and will rule the world from Jerusalem with his people Israel for one thousand years. We also believe that the Messiah Yeshua is the Torah incarnate. Just as the Torah is the way, the truth and the light, the Messiah is also the way, the truth and the light.
IV. SALVATION
We believe that through the death of Messiah, because of his blood covenant with us, we receive salvation by way of inheritance. This salvation comes by faith through grace alone and is not earned by Torah observance.
V. TORAH
The Torah of Truth the Almighty gave to His people, Israel, through Moshe. He will not exchange it nor discard it for another until heaven and earth pass away. We believe that Torah observance is man's moral obligation and expression of love to YHWH. The Torah is freedom and not bondage. The Torah is the way, the truth and the light and is for all of our generations forever.
Hi James :) I'm just trying to get this right...so it is the Torah and NOT the New Testament that is right ? And the purpose of getting 'into' the Torah is...? Does it fall into the category of "rightly dividing the Word of truth" I mean, I'm saved and I know it I'm saved and I know it (sorry, couldn't help that one )!!
I'm saved, I speak in tongues (what's your handle on that btw) I have a more than abundant life, I was personally present when my wifes' niece was instantaneously raised out of a coma, nearly dead, I have seen numerous physical healings and word of knowledge manifestations, so...what is the profit in ditching the N.T. for the Torah ?
??"Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them." ??
Yes, you are still there, and can't move beyond it, that's your choice and you've made it. I've made mine too.
The law is the guide dog that fetched the sheep to the shepherd. Temporary as a sacrifice until he paid the price. All our fathers looked forward to the day when something more perfect should come, for without him, God could only be approached through sacrifice and most diligent observance. Moses led God's people until Joshua, and the law leads us to Christ, Christ, in turn leads us into the unmerited grace of God. Christ ended the slow bleeding for God's people and brought us something never really known before, access to God.
Job said that God wasn't a man, as he was. He and God couldn't exactly sit down together over a cup of joe and talk things out, yanno? And he didn't have anyone to go to God and mediate for him. We do. When the law was given, man began to understand just how expansive his need was. He couldn't do it all and sacrifices were applied like band-aids until the Messiah came. There was this plan to help us, to stop the bleeding. It was a plan that God had, and with His son, He carried it out.
God and Christ did this for us at great expense, out of love for us, so that we wouldn't have to be entangled. For Christ is the end of the law, and the beginning of grace for man. He was the only one that ever did the law, and God accepts through Christ's accomplishments. There is no other way.
Edited to add:
This is less about the Way International than your other posts, and probably belongs in "Doctrine'
... so...what is the profit in ditching the N.T. for the Torah ?
I don't think you quite understand James position.. He doesn't advocate throwing out the NT. Nor did the NT advocate ditching the laws. Only dispensational theology teaches that. But there are many other ways to view the NT. Well, actually even just saying NT is incorrect.. It's really the New Covenant poorly translated as the New Testament.. And James seems to have accepted the New Covenant which is what Christ offers. Ignoring laws brings about lawlessness which Christ did not come to do.. He came to fulfill.
"What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.
... God and Christ did this for us at great expense, out of love for us, so that we wouldn't have to be entangled.
This is true.. But having laws or being entangled, ensnared, trapped, and a servant to sin are not the same. Having no rules no regulations nothing to abide by AKA no laws is not what Christ came to proclaim.. He did not proclaim lawlessness, he prclaimed freedom from the effects of sin. And the whole entire law is summed up in love your neighbor and love God.. Yes, those are the law. And the effects of not abiding by such which we all are guilty of (I, daily) has been abated. But it doesn't mean I'm not to abide such things. Course some of the laws of the old covenant are no longer necessary. But that's for those who haven't accepted the new covenant.. All has to do with covenants.
But you're right, this is a topic for Doctrine.. hehe..
I am saying that the Torah is for all generations forever. Yes I also accept the books known as the "New Testament". I maintain that Yeshua ("Jesus") did not come to create a new religion, but to be the Jewish Messiah of Judaism.
Hi James :) I'm just trying to get this right...so it is the Torah and NOT the New Testament that is right ? And the purpose of getting 'into' the Torah is...? Does it fall into the category of "rightly dividing the Word of truth" I mean, I'm saved and I know it I'm saved and I know it (sorry, couldn't help that one )!!
I'm saved, I speak in tongues (what's your handle on that btw) I have a more than abundant life, I was personally present when my wifes' niece was instantaneously raised out of a coma, nearly dead, I have seen numerous physical healings and word of knowledge manifestations, so...what is the profit in ditching the N.T. for the Torah ?
??"Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them." ??
Yes, you are still there, and can't move beyond it, that's your choice and you've made it. I've made mine too.
The law is the guide dog that fetched the sheep to the shepherd. Temporary as a sacrifice until he paid the price. All our fathers looked forward to the day when something more perfect should come, for without him, God could only be approached through sacrifice and most diligent observance. Moses led God's people until Joshua, and the law leads us to Christ, Christ, in turn leads us into the unmerited grace of God. Christ ended the slow bleeding for God's people and brought us something never really known before, access to God.
Edited to add:
This is less about the Way International than your other posts, and probably belongs in "Doctrine'
For All your Generations Forever
Now we have already shown that in studying the New Testament we must ask ourselves "can you get here from there?" ("there" being the Tanak (Old Testament)). If we understand something in the New Testament in such a way that it contradicts the Tanak, then we must be misunderstanding it. Now there are many who understand many New Testament passages in such a way as to believe and teach that the Torah has been abolished. Let us be like noble Bereans and let us look in the Tanak to see if this is so (Acts 17:11). After all Paul tells us that the Tanak is "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, [and] for instruction" (2Tim. 3:16). So what does the Tanak say? Was the Torah to be for all generations, forever? or would it one day be abolished? If the Torah would one day be abolished, then we should be able to find this taught in the Tanak. As Noble Bereans we should be checking to see if the things we have been taught can be found in the Tanak. By contrast, if the Torah would not be abolished, but would be for all generations forever, then we should be able to find that information in the Torah as well. Since the Tanak is profitable for doctrine and correction, perhaps we can seek the truth on this issue from the Tanak:
...it shall be a statute forever
to their generations.... (Ex. 27:21)
...it shall be a statute forever to him
and his seed after him. (Ex. 28:43)
...a statute forever... (Ex. 29:28)
...it shall be a statute forever to them,
to him and to his seed
throughout their generations. (Ex. 30:21)
It is a sign between me
and the children of Israel forever. (Ex. 31:17)
There is no shortage of passages in the Torah which specify that the Torah will not be abolished but will be for all generations forever. (For more see: Lev. 6:18, 22; 7:34, 36; 10:9, 15; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 41; 24:3; Num. 10:8; 15:15; 18:8, 11, 19, 23; 19:10 and Deut. 5:29)
Moreover the Psalmist writes:
Your word is truth from the beginning:
and every one of your righteous judgements
endures forever.
(Psalm 119:160)
Furthermore the Tanak tells us that the Torah is not to be changed or taken away from:
You shall not add to the word
which I command you,
neither shall you diminish a thing from it,
that you may keep the commandments
of YHWH your God which I command you.
(Deut 4:2)
Whatever thing I command you,
observe to do it: you shall not add thereto,
nor diminish from it.
(Deut. 12:32)
So if we are "Noble Bereans" we will find that the Tanak teaches that the Torah will not be abolished but will endure for all generations forever. This teaching from the Tanak is profitable to us for doctrine, for reproval and for correction.
The Messiah echoes this teaching:
Do not think that I have come
to destroy the Torah or the Prophets.
I have not come to destroy but to fulfill.
For assuredly, I say to you,
till heaven and earth pass away,
one yud or one mark will by no means
pass from the Torah till all is fulfilled.
Whoever therefore breaks one of the least
of these commandments, and teaches men so,
he will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven;
but whoever does and teaches them
will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.
(Matt. 5:17-19 see also Lk. 16:17).
As does Paul:
Do we then abolish the Torah through trust?
Absolutely not! We uphold the Torah!
(Rom. 3:31)
Despite the fact that David was saved by faith alone (Rom. 4:5-8) he loved the Torah and delighted in it (Ps. 119: 97, 113, 163). Paul (Paul) also delighted in the Torah (Rom. 7:22) and called it "holy, just and good." (Rom. 7:12). There is nothing wrong with the Torah that Elohim should want to abolish or destroy it, in fact both the Tenach and the New Scriptures call the Torah "perfect" (Ps. 19:7; James 1:25).
The Torah is even called in the New Testament "the Torah of Messiah" (Gal. 6:2). To say that the Torah was not forever and is not for all generations, is to call Elohim a liar.
Another popular teaching in the church is a teaching that Elohim only gave the Torah to Israel to prove that they could not keep it. For example one book states:
...Israel, in blindness and pride and self-
righteousness, presumed to ask for the law;
and God granted their request, to show them
that they could not keep his law...
(God's Plan of the Ages; Louis T. Tallbot; 1970; p. 66)
Now lets think this through for a moment. God gives Israel the Torah. He says he will place curses upon Israel if they fail to keep the Torah (Lev. 26 & Deut 28-29). He sends prophets to warn Israel of pending destruction because of their continual failure to keep Torah. Eventually God allows Babylon to invade Jerusalem and the Jews to be taken into captivity, because of their failure to keep Torah. Then he comes along and says "Nah, I was only fooling. I just gave you the Torah to prove you could not do it." What kind of God would that be? Of course as noble Bereans we can simply look in the Tanak to see if this poular teaching is true. Let us see what the Tanak says on this issue:
For this commandment which I command you this day
it is not to hard for you, neither is it far off.
It is not in heaven, that you should say:
" Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us,
and make us to hear it, that we may do it?"
Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say:
"Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it to us,
and make us hear it, that we may do it?"
But the Word is very near to you, in your mouth,
and in your heart, that you may do it.
(Deut. 30:11-14)
The fact that the Torah can be kept is confirmed as well in the New Testament which tells us that Yeshua was tempted in all things just as we are and he did keep the Torah (Heb. 4:15).
The Nazarenes saw Paul as having been spoken of by the Prophet Isaiah. As we reed in the Ancient Nazarene commentary on Is. 9:1-4 (8:23-93 in Jewish versions) as cited by Jerome:
The Nazarenes, whose opinion I have set forth above,
try to explain this passage in the following way:
When Messiah came and his proclaiming shone out,
the land of Zebulon and Naphtali first of all were
freed from the errors of the Scribes and Pharisees
and he shook off their shoulders the very heavy yoke
of the Jewish traditions. Later, however, the proclaiming became more dominant, that means the proclaiming was multiplied, through the Goodnews of the emissary Paul who was the least of all the emissaries. And the goodnews of Messiah shone to the most distant tribes and the way of the whole sea. Finally the whole world, which earlier walked
or sat in darkness and was imprisoned in the bonds of idolatry and death, has seen the clear light of the goodnews.
(Note: The "Jewish traditions" in the context of this commentary refer to Rabbinic Halachah of the fourth century CE with which the Nazarenes took issue.)
Now Isaiah 9:1-4 refers to "Galilee of the GOYIM (nations/Gentiles)" but identifies these "Gentiles" as the inhabitants of "the land of Zebulon and Naphtali". Here the House of Israel is being identified as "Gentiles". There are at least two other places in Scripture where the word "Gentile" is used to describe Ephraim (the House of Israel). One of these is Gen. 48:19 where (in the Hebrew) Ephraim is told his descendants will become "a multitude of nations (GOYIM; Gentiles)" (compare Rom. 11:25 where the same phrase is translated in the KJV as "fullness of the gentiles"). The other case is in Rom. 9:24 which refers to "Jews" and "Gentiles" but then goes on (in Rom. 9:25-26) to quote Hosea (Hos. 2:23; 1:10) to identify them which the "Children of Judah" and "the Children of Israel" (Hosea 1:10-11; 2:23).
The Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah understands "you have multiplied the nation" (Is. 9:3) to refer to Paul "the proclaiming was multiplied, through the Goodnews of the emissary Paul... to the most distant tribes". Therefore the ancient Nazarenes understood the "Gentiles" to whom Paul primarily directed his message with the Ephraimite "Gentiles" of Isaiah 9:1-4 and with "the most distant tribes".
This comment in the Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah makes it clear that the Ancient Sect of Nazarene Judaism held that Paul was an emissary to the Ephraimites.
I cannot accept that interpretation. I do not believe that before Messiah's death Gentiles were just fuel for the fire of Hell.
To the contrary MANY gentiles came to the true faith in so called "Old Testament Times". Ruth was a Moabitess. We read in Esther:
And in every province, and in every city, whithersoever the king's commandment and
his decree came, the Jews had gladness and joy; a feast and a good day. And many from
among the peoples of the land, became Jews: for the fear of the Jews was fallen upon
them.
(Esther 8:17 HRV)
Jonah was sent to urge the Ninevehites to repent... to what end if the way was closed to them.
Discussion carried over from the other HRV thread.
I don't believe I was arguing that before Messiah's death Gentiles were just fuel for gehenna. What I was discussing was that they did not have access into the Holy of Holies. That is different. That is High Priest access. Reserved for once a year access for the chief priest of the Levites.
Your examples show God's heart for others not of the nation of Israel through OT times. They are accurate. Others I can think of are God protecting the Philistines and their army prospering when David was hiding out from Saul. Moses married an Ethiopian woman.
The illustration and teaching of the torn veil are that God does not desire a barrier between Himself and His children. It only has been in place there due to the hardness of their hearts. He desires His children to know Him face to face as Moses did. And He provided a plan, an atonement sacrifice, a scapegoat who was pure without blemish to be killed to atone for the sins of all who would accept the Messiah. Whether Jew or Gentile.
The Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah understands "you have multiplied the nation" (Is. 9:3) to refer to Paul "the proclaiming was multiplied, through the Goodnews of the emissary Paul... to the most distant tribes". Therefore the ancient Nazarenes understood the "Gentiles" to whom Paul primarily directed his message with the Ephraimite "Gentiles" of Isaiah 9:1-4 and with "the most distant tribes".
This comment in the Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah makes it clear that the Ancient Sect of Nazarene Judaism held that Paul was an emissary to the Ephraimites.
I suppose in one sense you could consider all Gentiles among "the most distant tribes". They are spoken of as a branch grafted in on a tree.
One other question regarding the eternal nature of the Torah. What of all of the laws that pertain more to civil government that are handled currently by secular government as opposed to spiritual leadership? What of dietary laws?
One other question regarding the eternal nature of the Torah. What of all of the laws that pertain more to civil government that are handled currently by secular government as opposed to spiritual leadership? What of dietary laws?
Well the Theocracy does not exist and will not exist again until Messiah returns, so we are not authorized to carry out penalties. As a result death was replaced by disfellowshipment. That was the case in Yeshua's day as well.
Other than that I am not sure what you mean.
The dietary laws are for all generations forever, just as the whole Torah is.
As a result death was replaced by disfellowshipment.
Now there's something TWI is good at.
So Levitical law in the Torah is eternal. What about all of the laws regarding sacrifice? Do we still offer up a lamb of the first year, and bring it to the Levites?
Do we still sprinkle blood on our door openings as part of the Passover?
One challenge with upholding the letter of the law is that it was originally revealed in a much different day and time and society. What laws govern the use of the Internet, for example? Automobiles? Pollution? Cloning?
This is an issue with law. Certainly the heart and intent of God with respect to His children remains unchanged. In that I see the Torah as eternal truth. However when you have actual physical details to carry out to uphold it, then it starts becoming subject to man's intervention. Like you mentioned about death being replaced by disfellowship. A man made that determination. Another one will make similar determinations about the appropriate replacement for blood on door jambs, and on and on, including automobiles, pollution, cloning, the Internet, dancing. The inherent problem is not eternal truth. It is man.
You see that's how the generational evolution of the Way International has gone. One dynamic charlatan with a degree mill doctorate specializing in homiletics, a bunch of hippies, the post Vietnam free love era, then people growing up and it turning gradually more and more into legalism. Many naieve and excited at the start, and a few left trying to protect their little plot of land and positions at the latter end.
Jesus / Yeshua came to fulfill the law, to complete the law. He encapsulated all of the 10 commandments into two - love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, and your neighbor as yourself. He is the law now, not the blood we sprinkle on a door jamb.
We keep the Torah that can be kept. The Torah requires animal sacrifices be made at the appointed place (the Temple) so until the Temple is rebuilt we cannot make these. However the original followers of Yeshua continued to make them. Hebrews teaches that the offerings continued each year as a remembrance (Heb. 11:2-2). Paul made offerings at the Temple long after Yeshua's death (Acts 21:17-26/Num. 6:13-21; Acts 24:17-18 see also Acts 18:18/Num 6:13-21). And the offerings will be made at the Millennial Temple (Ezek. 43:18-27). BTW there was no standing Temple in the days of Daniel, yet he was Torah Observant.
Matt. 5:17 Think not that I have come to abolish the Torah or the Prophets, I have come not to abolish, but to fulfill. – This is the only passage from the New Testament which is actually quoted, or more correctly paraphrased, in the Talmud. In the Talmud a certain Nazarene Judge is cited as having quoted the following phrase from a book called the ”The Good News”.
I have not come to take away from the Torah of Moshe
and I have not come to add to the Torah of Moshe
(b.Shabbat 116)
This passage refers to a Torah command which forbids adding to, or subtracting from, the Torah (Deut. 4:2; 12:32). The Tanak states clearly that the Torah would never be abolished:
...it shall be a statute forever
to their generations.... (Ex. 27:21)
...it shall be a statute forever to him
and his seed after him. (Ex. 28:43)
...a statute forever... (Ex. 29:28)
...it shall be a statute forever to them,
to him and to his seed
throughout their generations. (Ex. 30:21)
It is a sign between me
and the children of Israel forever. (Ex. 31:17)
There is no shortage of passages in the Torah which specify that the Torah will not be abolished but will be for all generations forever. (For more see: Lev. 6:18, 22; 7:34, 36; 10:9, 15; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 41; 24:3; Num. 10:8; 15:15; 18:8, 11, 19, 23; 19:10 and Deut. 5:29)
Moreover the Psalmist writes:
Your word is truth from the beginning:
and every one of your righteous judgments endures forever.
(Psalm 119:160)
Furthermore the Tanak tells us that the Torah is not to be changed or taken away from:
You shall not add to the word
which I command you,
neither shall you diminish a thing from it,
that you may keep the commandments
of YHWH your God which I command you.
(Deut 4:2)
Whatever thing I command you,
observe to do it: you shall not add thereto,
nor diminish from it.
(Deut. 12:32)
Similarly Paul writes:
Do we make the Torah of no effect by trust?
Absolutely not! On the contrary, we uphold the Torah!
(Rom. 3:31)
Despite the fact that David was saved by faith alone (Rom. 4:5-8) he loved the Torah and delighted in it (Ps. 119: 97, 113, 163). Paul (Paul) also delighted in the Torah (Rom. 7:22) and called it "holy, just and good." (Rom. 7:12). There is nothing wrong with the Torah that God should want to abolish or destroy it, in fact both the Tanak and the New Scriptures call the Torah "perfect" (Ps. 19:7; James 1:25). The Torah is even called in the New Testament "the Torah of Messiah" (Gal. 6:2). To say that the Torah was not forever and is not for all generations, is to call YHWH a liar.
Abolish/destroy…fulfill – In Hebrew and Aramaic these are idiomatic expressions. To “fulfil” the Torah means to keep and teach the Torah according to its true meaning. To “destroy” the Torah is to teach its meaning in correctly and to violate Torah. Yeshua came to teach the true meaning of Torah, thus in 5:21f he will teach the true meaning of various commandments of the Torah.
“love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength,”
This is nothing new… this is what the Totah says (Deut. 6:4)
and your neighbor as yourself.
This is also nothing new, it is a commandment in the Torah (Lev. 19:18)
Now there's something TWI is good at.
So Levitical law in the Torah is eternal. What about all of the laws regarding sacrifice? Do we still offer up a lamb of the first year, and bring it to the Levites?
Do we still sprinkle blood on our door openings as part of the Passover?
One challenge with upholding the letter of the law is that it was originally revealed in a much different day and time and society. What laws govern the use of the Internet, for example? Automobiles? Pollution? Cloning?
This is an issue with law. Certainly the heart and intent of God with respect to His children remains unchanged. In that I see the Torah as eternal truth. However when you have actual physical details to carry out to uphold it, then it starts becoming subject to man's intervention. Like you mentioned about death being replaced by disfellowship. A man made that determination. Another one will make similar determinations about the appropriate replacement for blood on door jambs, and on and on, including automobiles, pollution, cloning, the Internet, dancing. The inherent problem is not eternal truth. It is man.
You see that's how the generational evolution of the Way International has gone. One dynamic charlatan with a degree mill doctorate specializing in homiletics, a bunch of hippies, the post Vietnam free love era, then people growing up and it turning gradually more and more into legalism. Many naieve and excited at the start, and a few left trying to protect their little plot of land and positions at the latter end.
Jesus / Yeshua came to fulfill the law, to complete the law. He encapsulated all of the 10 commandments into two - love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, and your neighbor as yourself. He is the law now, not the blood we sprinkle on a door jamb.
I suppose one of the problems I have is that I have some relatives that are Jewish, and in a rather strict orthodox sense (their words). I also have some relative s that are Catholic. I remember how much fun it was when they got together - <grin> Love wasn't a good description of what I saw taking place. I learned that the Law was simply a stupid set of codes that was outdated and Illegal anyways. What if a stoning was required by the law,... due to the circumstances? I don't see a lot of stonings these days. So there are some laws that Jews simply ignore But offer them a BLT and you'd think the sky had fallen! The Law is just whatever in the heck they want it to be, and this goes way beyond a few of my relatives, a long way beyond.... And the ones that strive to do every single thing that they can are usually too poor to do anything they'd like that was legal, and oddly sinned with about the same regularity anyways. I could write a book about some of the funny things I've noticed.
Anyways I have a question for James, and it's an honest one, based in my simple curiosity.
How stringently do you believe the law should be followed? You probably know the law a lot better than I and what all it entails, But I think you also believe that Jesus was the Messiah, and you're aware of the troubles that were caused in the early church by disagreements over how much legalism was healthy for the believers. We have a record of Jesus telling Peter to eat some unclean food, post ascension and admonitions not to use the liberty they had in the law (somehow) as an occasion to the flesh.
But it seems to me that you are saying that there is no real change here, while there obviously has been some. I don't see Jews stoning sinners that the law would support it on. Or do they in secret, stone people to death still? ...following the law. yes, it's an extreme example and no I don't see them doing stonings, yet that is the law and there are other laws they seem to have shoved under the table, I'm sure you can think of a short list pretty easily yourself. But I'd like to hear your views on the balance that that this has become and whether or not that's healthy or correct. And you are in a rather unique position to see things a bit from each side. I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter,... what you know. and I'll not comment afterward in any negative sense, after all, I'm asking a favor of you here.
I will try to respond to the rest of this timorrow, as I am about to head off to bed for th rnight.
However you mentioned Yeshua telling Paul to eat unkosher food.
I assume you refer to the common misunderstand of Acts 10 (though this is Peter/Kefa) not Paul.
The following is my commentary on Acts. unfortunately the Aramaic fonts appear as "gibberish" English letters:
10:1-2 Now there was one man in Caesarea; a centurion, and his name was Cornelius; from the band of soldiers that was called Italian. And he was righteous and feared Eloah, he and his entire house. And he did much tzedakah among the people, and all the time was entreating Eloah.
This is probably the same Centurion who once came to Yeshua seeking healing for his servant (see Mt. 8:5-13 = Lk. 7:1-10). If so, this is he of whom the people told Yeshua:
…he is worthy that you do this for him:
For he loves our people,
and also has built for us a synagogue.
(Lk. 7:4b-5)
“feared Eloah” )hl) Nm )wh lxdw literally “feared he from Eloah”. The Greek has foboumenoj ton Qeon “feared Eloah”. This may have been a technical term for Gentiles who sere semi-converts to Judaism, who accepted the Noachide laws but had not yet been circumcised into the Mosaic Covenant. (See Acts 13:16)
10:3 at nine hours into the day – See comment to Acts 3:1
10:9b …Shim’on went up to the roof to pray, at the sixth hour.
See comments to Acts 3:1
10:11 and a kind of garment being held by four corners,
and it was like a great linen cloth, The implication is that the garment was a tallit (prayer shawl) being lowered by the tzitzit on the four corners (Numbers 15:37-41).
10:12 And there were in it, all four-footed animals, and creeping things of the earth, and birds of heaven. Later we are told that these animals represent the three Gentiles who came to see Kefa (Acts 11:5-12). In 1Enoch 85-90 these animals are used to represent various groups of Gentiles.
10:13 arise, kill and eat – Kefa was not being unstructed to arise kill and eat the animals mentioned in verse 12. First of all this was not real, it was a vision. Secondly we know from Acts 11:5-12 that the Animals represented Gentiles. Kefa was not being told to kill the Gentiles. Instead he was being instructed to greet them as guests by arisng, killing an animal and eating (see for example Gen. 18:1-8 when Avrham greeted three men as guests).
10:14 I have never eaten anything that is defiled (bysm) or unclean ()m+) – The two words here in the Aramaic have different shades of meaning. bysm or as it appears in the dialect of the Jerusalem Talmud b)sm is used in the phrase b)sm )® “defiled land” referring to land outside of Israel, the land of the Gentiles (Y.Kil, IX, 32c). Whereas )m+ refers to that which is unclean, such as unkosher food.
10:15 That which Eloah has cleansed do not regard as defiled. Only the word “defiled” is repeated in this verse (see the previous verse). The voice does not say not to call food unclean, but not to call that which the food represents (Gentiles) “defiled” (see comments to verses 12, 12 and 14).
10:25-26 And while Shim’on was entering, Cornelius met him, and fell down; worshipped at his feet. And Shim’on raised him up and said to him, Stand up! I also am a son of man. Kefa did not respond with “Kiss my ring, I’m the first Pope!”
10:28 And he said to them, You know that it is not lawful, for a Jewish man to associate with a strange man, who is not a son of his kindred: The word “lawful” here (spm) refers not to the Torah, but to something that is allowed or permitted as a custom. strange ()yrkwn) man the term is used in the Targums to refer to foreigners, for example Targum Onkelos uses this word to render the phrase “you may not set a foreigner over you” in Deut. 17:15.
but Eloah showed me, that I should not say concerning a man, that he is unclean or defiled. As shown in the comments to Acts 10:11-15.
Nah,... I wrote Peter, and the post hasn't been edited, and thanks for answwering that part.
Sorry, my mistake.
As for capitol punishment, we do not have that authority any longer, and will not until the Messiah returns to re-establish the Kingdom of Israel theocracy.
We keep the Torah that we can keep, so in the absence of the Temple we cannot make animal sacrifices until it is rebuilt.
Paul is greatly misunderstood as having taught that the Torah is not for today. I have met a great many who feel uncomfortable with his writings. Some of these have even, like the Ebionites of ancient times, removed Paul's from their canon (Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 3:27:4). This belief that Yeshua may not have abolished the Torah, but that Paul did, has been propagated since ancient times. The "Toldot Yeshu" for example, an ancient hostile Rabbinic parody on the Gospels and Acts, accuses Paul of contradicting Yeshua on this very issue (Toldot Yeshu 6:16-41; 7:3-5). At least one modern Dispensationalist, Maurice Johnson, taught that the Messiah did not abolish the Torah, but that Paul did several years after the fact. He writes:
Apparently God allowed this system of Jewish
ordinances to be practiced about thirty years
after Christ fulfilled it because in His patience,
God only gradually showed the Jews how it was
that His program was changing.... Thus it was
that after God had slowly led the Christians
out of Jewish religion He had Paul finally
write these glorious, liberating truths.
(Saved by "Dry" Baptism! ; a pamphlet by
Maurice Johnson; pp. 9-10)
Kefa warns us in the Scriptures that Paul's writings are difficult to understand. He warns us saying:
...in which are some things hard to understand,
which those who are untaught and unstable
twist to their own destruction,
as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.
(2Pt. 3:15-16)
Paul knew that his teachings were being twisted, he mentions this in Romans, saying:
And why not say, "Let us do evil that good may come"?
-- as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm
that we say." (Rom. 3:8)
Paul elaborates on this slanderous twist of his teachings, saying:
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin
that grace may abound? Certainly not!..."
(Rom. 6:1-2)
and
What then? Shall we sin because we are not
under the Torah but under grace? Certainly not!"
(Rom. 6:15).
So then, Paul was misunderstood as teaching that because we
are under grace, we need not observe the Torah.
Upon his visit to Jerusalem in Acts 21 Paul was confronted with this slanerous twist of his teachings. He was told:
You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews
there are who believe, and they are all zealous
for the Torah; but they have been informed about
you that you teach all the Jews who are among
the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they
ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk
according to the customs.
(Acts 21:20-21)
In order to prove that this was nothing more than slander, Paul takes
the nazarite vow and goes to make offerings (sacrifices) at the Temple (Acts 21:22-26 & Num. 6:13-21) demonstrating that he himself kept the Torah (Acts 21:24). Paul did and said many things to prove that he both kept and taught the Torah. He:
• circumcised Timothy (Acts 16:1-3)
• took the nazarite vow (Acts 18:18; 21:17-26)
• taught and observed the Jewish holy days such as:
• Passover (Acts 20:6; 1Cor. 5:6-8; 11:17-34)
• Shavuot (Pentecost) (Acts 20:16; 1Cor. 16:8)
• fasting on Yom Kippur (Acts 27:9)
• and even performed animal sacrifices
in the Temple (Acts 21:17-26/Num. 6:13-21;
Acts 24:17-18)
Among his more notable statements on the subject are:
• "Neither against the Jewish Torah,
nor against the Temple, nor against Caesar
have I offended in anything at all." (Acts 25:8)
• "I have done nothing against our people
or the customs of our fathers." (Acts 28:17)
• "...the Torah is holy and the commandment
is holy and just and good." (Rom. 7:12)
• "Do we then nullify the Torah through faith?
May it never be! On the contrary, we maintain
the Torah." (Rom. 3:31).
Was Paul a Hypocrite?
Being confronted with the various acts and statements of Paul which support the Torah, many of the "Torah is not for today" teachers accuse Paul of being hypocritical. Charles Ryrie, for example, footnotes Acts 21:24 in his Ryrie Study Bible calling Paul a "middle of the road
Christian" for performing such acts. Another writer, M.A. DeHaan wrote an entire book entitled "Five Blunders of Paul" which characterizes these acts as "blunders." "These teachers of lawlessness" credit Paul as the champion of their doctrine, and then condemn him for not teaching their doctrine. If Paul was really a hypocrite, could he honestly have condemned hypocrisy so fervently (see Gal. 2:11-15). Consider some of his own words:
For now do I persuade the sons of men or Eloah? Or do I seek to please the sons of men? For if until now I had pleased the sons of men, I would not have been a servant of the Messiah.
(Gal. 1:10 HRV)
And you know, my brothers, that our entrance unto you was not in vain,
but first we suffered and were dishonored, as you know, in Philippi, and then with great struggle we spoke to you with the boldness of our Eloah the good news of the Messiah.
For our exhortation was not from deception nor from impurity nor with treachery.
But as we were approved of Eloah to be entrusted with his Good News, thus we speak, not so as to please the sons of men, but Eloah, who searches our hearts.
For we never used flattering speech, as you know, nor a pretext of greediness; Eloah [is] witness.
(1Thes. 2:1-5 HRV)
If Paul was a hypocrite, he must have been one of the slickest con-men in history!
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
6
6
12
5
Popular Days
May 25
16
May 26
15
Jun 6
10
May 24
8
Top Posters In This Topic
Abigail 6 posts
chockfull 6 posts
James Trimm 12 posts
polynesian 5 posts
Popular Days
May 25 2010
16 posts
May 26 2010
15 posts
Jun 6 2010
10 posts
May 24 2010
8 posts
Popular Posts
WordWolf
Looks like the general pleasantries are over, and James Trimm is now trying to advertise for converts on the GSC. The GSC posters are all very cynical- once bitten, twice shy. We're not looking for
geisha779
The more things change...the more they stay the same. :) This is not much different than what Paul was confronted by in the 1st century....(dare I say it?) CHURCH. It did some serious damage to his re
Abigail
Well, my spelling was off. It is actually the Noahic laws, they are the 7 commandments given to Noah after the flood: 1) to establish courts of justice 2) not to commit blasphemy 3) not to commit
Thomas Loy Bumgarner
James, I thought the term"The Way" meant road, path, trail, or teaching in the Semetic, Greek, and Latin languages as well as modern ones.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
polynesian
Galatians 5:1-4 tells me that if I try to justify myself THROUGH the 'law' I am fallen from grace, rather, I am to stand fast in the 'liberty' of Christ Jesus.
From what I see, the Apostle Paul wrote way too much about Grace versus Law for me to accept he spent 3 years attempting to 'perfect' himself in order to be able to join what you are purporting to be the 'true church' of Christ
Link to comment
Share on other sites
polynesian
Another thought too...whether it was the jailer and his household who received salvation or Cornelius and his family, it was through baptism and confession and was somewhat instantaneous, not some sort of doctrinal and practical apprenticeship ( unless I've mistaken what you are proposing ?) No-one really denies Jesus initially 'came to his own', Israel, however, 'his own' rejected him and thereby paved 'the way' for the Gentiles to receive him and everything that entails.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
They made up their minds . . . and they started packing . . . they left before the sun came up that day . . .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
An exit to eternal summer slacking . . . But where were they going without ever knowing the way?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
Galatians 4:21-5:6
In prompting this study I will begin with Gal. 5:2:
Behold, I Paul say to you, that if you be circumcised,
Christ shall profit you nothing.
Gal. 5:2 KJV
At first glance one might think after reading this verse that this one verse disproves the entire case made throughout the book you are now reading. But the key is that we must take the verse in context. One basic rule of hermeneutics is to ask yourself "who is speaking?" and "who is being spoken to?" Now we know that Paul is the speaker, but who is the "you" in Gal. 5:2? Is it the Galatians in general? Is it all mankind? Is it the modern reader? The answer to all of these questions is "no". If we look up just a little bit in Paul's letter here we will see that Gal. 5:2 is the summary of an argument that he initiates in Gal. 4:21 and which he illustrates in Gal. 4:22-31. Gal. 4:21 tells us exactly who the "you" in 5:2 is. He writes:
Tell me, you that desire to be under the law,
do you not hear the law?
Gal. 4:21
Note that "you" is defined in 4:21 as "you that desire to be under the law" Thus Gal. 5:2 should be understood to mean:
Behold, I Paul say
to you, [that desire to be under the law]
that if you be circumcised,
Christ shall profit you nothing
What does the phrase "Under the Law" mean?
Much of the confusion about Paul's teachings on the Torah involves two scripture phrases, which appear in the New Testament only in Paul's writings (in Rom. Gal. & 1Cor.). These two phrases are "works of the law" and "under the law", each of which appears 10 times in the Scriptures.
The first of these phrases, "works of the law", is best understood through its usage in Gal. 2:16. Here Paul writes:
knowing that a man is not justified by works of the law but by faith in Yeshua the Messiah,
even we have believed in Messiah Yeshua,
that we might be justified by faith in Messiah
and not by the works of the law;
for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.
Paul uses this phrase to describe a false method of justification which is diametrically opposed to "faith in the Messiah". To Paul "works of the law" is not an obsolete Old Testament system, but a heresy that has never been true.
The term "works of the Torah" has shown up as a technical theological term used in a document in the Dead Sea Scrolls called MMT which says:
Now we have written to you some of the
works of the law, those which we determined
would be beneficial for you...
And it will be reckoned to you as righteousness,
in that you have done what is right and good before Him...
(4QMMT (4Q394-399) Section C lines 26b-31)
The second of these phrases is "under the law". This phrase may best be understood from its usage in Rom. 6:14, "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under the law but under grace." Paul, therefore, sees "under grace" and "under the law" as diametrically opposed, one cannot be both. The truth is that since we have always been under grace (see Gen. 6:8; Ex. 33:12, 17; Judges 6:17f; Jer. 31:2) we have never been "under the law". This is because the Torah was created for man, man was not created for the Torah (see Mk. 2:27). "Under the law" then, is not an obsolete Old Testament system, but a false teaching, which was never true.
There can be no doubt that Paul sees "works of the law" and "under the law" as categorically bad, yet Paul calls the Torah itself "holy, just and good" (Rom. 7:12), certainly Paul does not use these phrases to refer to the Torah itself.
The phrase "under the law" therefore, does not refer to the Torah itself but to a false teaching that was never true. So Paul is telling these people who are ready to apostatize and seek salvation through the false "under the law" doctrine, that their circumcisions will profit them nothing. Following the context then the rest of Gal. 5 is addressed to the "you that desire to be under the law" of 4:21.
Now let us examine the midrash Paul gives in Gal. 4:22-31. Remember now, we know from Gal. 4:21 that Paul is going to be illustrating a contrast between the Torah and the "under the law" teaching. The parable may be illustrated in a chart as follows:
The Torah
Abraham’s son by the freewoman(Isaac) (Gal. 4:22)
Born by promise(Gal. 4:23)
Jerusalem which is above which is free,the mother of us all. [sarah](Gal. 4:26)
the liberty where with Messiah has made us free(Gal. 5:1)
Under the Law
Abraham’s son by the bondwoman(Ishmael) (Gal. 4:22)
Born after the flesh (Gal. 4:23)
from mount Sinai genders to bondage Hagar
entangled again with the yoke of bondage"(Gal. 5:1)
The Torah is freedom. False teachings such as the ANOMOS teaching, the "works of the law" teaching and the "under the law" teaching bring only bondage.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
Many have asked "Why have the Jews rejected Jesus?"… well let me make this clear, the only "Jesus" that most Jewish people have ever been exposed to is the "Jesus" that supposedly came to "free them from the bondage of the Law". Yes, they have rejected this Torahless Jesus, and rightly so. But most of them have never been exposed to the real Yeshua.
In coming years you will see many Jewish people embracing Yeshua as the Messiah. But the Yeshua that they accept will be the real Yeshua and not the Torahless "Jesus" that Christendom has adopted from pagan sources. The Jewish people know that an anti-Torah Messiah is no Messiah at all, they know better than to accept the rank paganism attached to Gentile Christianity.
The truth is that a great number of Orthodox Jews (even Rabbis) already know that Yeshua is the true and only Messiah, some of them have even confided this to me. At present they have no intention of disclosing this fact because they believe it would unite them with an anti-Torah Christianity which is overflowing with pagan customs and
practices, and a disdain for the Torah which is seen as "bondage".
The Jewish people will also come to realize that the books known as the "New Testament" (More correctly called the Ketuvim Netzarim, the "Writings of the Nazarenes") in their original Hebrew and Aramaic rather than their Greek translations, are as much a "Jewish Book" as the Tanak ("Old Testament")
It is not Christianity that the Jewish people will ultimately embrace, it is the ancient Nazarene sect of Judaism.
Read Romans 11, Paul says that if you thought wild branches being grafted in was a blessing to the world, wait until you see natural branches grafted into their own olive tree!
(Rom. 11:11-12, 15, 23-24)
Don't get me wrong, I do NOT teach that Torah observance earns salvation, absolutely not!
The following is taken from our statement of faith:
III. MESSIAH
We believe that Y'shua HaMashiach has come and with great joy we anticipate his return, and even though he may delay, nevertheless we endeavor to think about his return every day. We believe that the Messiah is the Word made flesh. We believe he was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life in accordance with the Torah, performed miracles, was crucified for the atonement of his people in accordance with the Scriptures, was bodily resurrected on the third day. ascended to heaven and currently sits at the right hand of YHWH. He will return at the end of this age to usher in the Kingdom of Elohim on earth and will rule the world from Jerusalem with his people Israel for one thousand years. We also believe that the Messiah Yeshua is the Torah incarnate. Just as the Torah is the way, the truth and the light, the Messiah is also the way, the truth and the light.
IV. SALVATION
We believe that through the death of Messiah, because of his blood covenant with us, we receive salvation by way of inheritance. This salvation comes by faith through grace alone and is not earned by Torah observance.
V. TORAH
The Torah of Truth the Almighty gave to His people, Israel, through Moshe. He will not exchange it nor discard it for another until heaven and earth pass away. We believe that Torah observance is man's moral obligation and expression of love to YHWH. The Torah is freedom and not bondage. The Torah is the way, the truth and the light and is for all of our generations forever.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
polynesian
Hi James :) I'm just trying to get this right...so it is the Torah and NOT the New Testament that is right ? And the purpose of getting 'into' the Torah is...? Does it fall into the category of "rightly dividing the Word of truth" I mean, I'm saved and I know it
I'm saved and I know it 
(sorry, couldn't help that one )!!
I'm saved, I speak in tongues (what's your handle on that btw) I have a more than abundant life, I was personally present when my wifes' niece was instantaneously raised out of a coma, nearly dead, I have seen numerous physical healings and word of knowledge manifestations, so...what is the profit in ditching the N.T. for the Torah ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
??"Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them." ??
Yes, you are still there, and can't move beyond it, that's your choice and you've made it. I've made mine too.
The law is the guide dog that fetched the sheep to the shepherd. Temporary as a sacrifice until he paid the price. All our fathers looked forward to the day when something more perfect should come, for without him, God could only be approached through sacrifice and most diligent observance. Moses led God's people until Joshua, and the law leads us to Christ, Christ, in turn leads us into the unmerited grace of God. Christ ended the slow bleeding for God's people and brought us something never really known before, access to God.
Job said that God wasn't a man, as he was. He and God couldn't exactly sit down together over a cup of joe and talk things out, yanno? And he didn't have anyone to go to God and mediate for him. We do. When the law was given, man began to understand just how expansive his need was. He couldn't do it all and sacrifices were applied like band-aids until the Messiah came. There was this plan to help us, to stop the bleeding. It was a plan that God had, and with His son, He carried it out.
God and Christ did this for us at great expense, out of love for us, so that we wouldn't have to be entangled. For Christ is the end of the law, and the beginning of grace for man. He was the only one that ever did the law, and God accepts through Christ's accomplishments. There is no other way.
Edited to add:
This is less about the Way International than your other posts, and probably belongs in "Doctrine'
Edited by Gen-2Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Looks like the general pleasantries are over, and James Trimm is now trying to
advertise for converts on the GSC.
The GSC posters are all very cynical- once bitten, twice shy.
We're not looking for another organization, another special group which is the elite
group of Christian with the "exclusive" truth while all other Christians walk in darkness.
We've been there, done that, bought the T-shirts.
You've advertised your books, you've celebrated your victory over twi
(if it actually happened as you stated),
but that's as far as you can expect to get.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TrustAndObey
I don't think you quite understand James position.. He doesn't advocate throwing out the NT. Nor did the NT advocate ditching the laws. Only dispensational theology teaches that. But there are many other ways to view the NT. Well, actually even just saying NT is incorrect.. It's really the New Covenant poorly translated as the New Testament.. And James seems to have accepted the New Covenant which is what Christ offers. Ignoring laws brings about lawlessness which Christ did not come to do.. He came to fulfill.
"What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.
This is true.. But having laws or being entangled, ensnared, trapped, and a servant to sin are not the same. Having no rules no regulations nothing to abide by AKA no laws is not what Christ came to proclaim.. He did not proclaim lawlessness, he prclaimed freedom from the effects of sin. And the whole entire law is summed up in love your neighbor and love God.. Yes, those are the law. And the effects of not abiding by such which we all are guilty of (I, daily) has been abated. But it doesn't mean I'm not to abide such things. Course some of the laws of the old covenant are no longer necessary. But that's for those who haven't accepted the new covenant.. All has to do with covenants.
But you're right, this is a topic for Doctrine.. hehe..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
James seems to be of the Messianic Jewish persuasion.
I am more of a Gentile background.
Jesus gave his life for both of us.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
soul searcher
Great song!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
I am saying that the Torah is for all generations forever. Yes I also accept the books known as the "New Testament". I maintain that Yeshua ("Jesus") did not come to create a new religion, but to be the Jewish Messiah of Judaism.
For All your Generations Forever
Now we have already shown that in studying the New Testament we must ask ourselves "can you get here from there?" ("there" being the Tanak (Old Testament)). If we understand something in the New Testament in such a way that it contradicts the Tanak, then we must be misunderstanding it. Now there are many who understand many New Testament passages in such a way as to believe and teach that the Torah has been abolished. Let us be like noble Bereans and let us look in the Tanak to see if this is so (Acts 17:11). After all Paul tells us that the Tanak is "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, [and] for instruction" (2Tim. 3:16). So what does the Tanak say? Was the Torah to be for all generations, forever? or would it one day be abolished? If the Torah would one day be abolished, then we should be able to find this taught in the Tanak. As Noble Bereans we should be checking to see if the things we have been taught can be found in the Tanak. By contrast, if the Torah would not be abolished, but would be for all generations forever, then we should be able to find that information in the Torah as well. Since the Tanak is profitable for doctrine and correction, perhaps we can seek the truth on this issue from the Tanak:
...it shall be a statute forever
to their generations.... (Ex. 27:21)
...it shall be a statute forever to him
and his seed after him. (Ex. 28:43)
...a statute forever... (Ex. 29:28)
...it shall be a statute forever to them,
to him and to his seed
throughout their generations. (Ex. 30:21)
It is a sign between me
and the children of Israel forever. (Ex. 31:17)
There is no shortage of passages in the Torah which specify that the Torah will not be abolished but will be for all generations forever. (For more see: Lev. 6:18, 22; 7:34, 36; 10:9, 15; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 41; 24:3; Num. 10:8; 15:15; 18:8, 11, 19, 23; 19:10 and Deut. 5:29)
Moreover the Psalmist writes:
Your word is truth from the beginning:
and every one of your righteous judgements
endures forever.
(Psalm 119:160)
Furthermore the Tanak tells us that the Torah is not to be changed or taken away from:
You shall not add to the word
which I command you,
neither shall you diminish a thing from it,
that you may keep the commandments
of YHWH your God which I command you.
(Deut 4:2)
Whatever thing I command you,
observe to do it: you shall not add thereto,
nor diminish from it.
(Deut. 12:32)
So if we are "Noble Bereans" we will find that the Tanak teaches that the Torah will not be abolished but will endure for all generations forever. This teaching from the Tanak is profitable to us for doctrine, for reproval and for correction.
The Messiah echoes this teaching:
Do not think that I have come
to destroy the Torah or the Prophets.
I have not come to destroy but to fulfill.
For assuredly, I say to you,
till heaven and earth pass away,
one yud or one mark will by no means
pass from the Torah till all is fulfilled.
Whoever therefore breaks one of the least
of these commandments, and teaches men so,
he will be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven;
but whoever does and teaches them
will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.
(Matt. 5:17-19 see also Lk. 16:17).
As does Paul:
Do we then abolish the Torah through trust?
Absolutely not! We uphold the Torah!
(Rom. 3:31)
Despite the fact that David was saved by faith alone (Rom. 4:5-8) he loved the Torah and delighted in it (Ps. 119: 97, 113, 163). Paul (Paul) also delighted in the Torah (Rom. 7:22) and called it "holy, just and good." (Rom. 7:12). There is nothing wrong with the Torah that Elohim should want to abolish or destroy it, in fact both the Tenach and the New Scriptures call the Torah "perfect" (Ps. 19:7; James 1:25).
The Torah is even called in the New Testament "the Torah of Messiah" (Gal. 6:2). To say that the Torah was not forever and is not for all generations, is to call Elohim a liar.
Another popular teaching in the church is a teaching that Elohim only gave the Torah to Israel to prove that they could not keep it. For example one book states:
...Israel, in blindness and pride and self-
righteousness, presumed to ask for the law;
and God granted their request, to show them
that they could not keep his law...
(God's Plan of the Ages; Louis T. Tallbot; 1970; p. 66)
Now lets think this through for a moment. God gives Israel the Torah. He says he will place curses upon Israel if they fail to keep the Torah (Lev. 26 & Deut 28-29). He sends prophets to warn Israel of pending destruction because of their continual failure to keep Torah. Eventually God allows Babylon to invade Jerusalem and the Jews to be taken into captivity, because of their failure to keep Torah. Then he comes along and says "Nah, I was only fooling. I just gave you the Torah to prove you could not do it." What kind of God would that be? Of course as noble Bereans we can simply look in the Tanak to see if this poular teaching is true. Let us see what the Tanak says on this issue:
For this commandment which I command you this day
it is not to hard for you, neither is it far off.
It is not in heaven, that you should say:
" Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us,
and make us to hear it, that we may do it?"
Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say:
"Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it to us,
and make us hear it, that we may do it?"
But the Word is very near to you, in your mouth,
and in your heart, that you may do it.
(Deut. 30:11-14)
The fact that the Torah can be kept is confirmed as well in the New Testament which tells us that Yeshua was tempted in all things just as we are and he did keep the Torah (Heb. 4:15).
The Nazarenes saw Paul as having been spoken of by the Prophet Isaiah. As we reed in the Ancient Nazarene commentary on Is. 9:1-4 (8:23-93 in Jewish versions) as cited by Jerome:
The Nazarenes, whose opinion I have set forth above,
try to explain this passage in the following way:
When Messiah came and his proclaiming shone out,
the land of Zebulon and Naphtali first of all were
freed from the errors of the Scribes and Pharisees
and he shook off their shoulders the very heavy yoke
of the Jewish traditions. Later, however, the proclaiming became more dominant, that means the proclaiming was multiplied, through the Goodnews of the emissary Paul who was the least of all the emissaries. And the goodnews of Messiah shone to the most distant tribes and the way of the whole sea. Finally the whole world, which earlier walked
or sat in darkness and was imprisoned in the bonds of idolatry and death, has seen the clear light of the goodnews.
(Note: The "Jewish traditions" in the context of this commentary refer to Rabbinic Halachah of the fourth century CE with which the Nazarenes took issue.)
Now Isaiah 9:1-4 refers to "Galilee of the GOYIM (nations/Gentiles)" but identifies these "Gentiles" as the inhabitants of "the land of Zebulon and Naphtali". Here the House of Israel is being identified as "Gentiles". There are at least two other places in Scripture where the word "Gentile" is used to describe Ephraim (the House of Israel). One of these is Gen. 48:19 where (in the Hebrew) Ephraim is told his descendants will become "a multitude of nations (GOYIM; Gentiles)" (compare Rom. 11:25 where the same phrase is translated in the KJV as "fullness of the gentiles"). The other case is in Rom. 9:24 which refers to "Jews" and "Gentiles" but then goes on (in Rom. 9:25-26) to quote Hosea (Hos. 2:23; 1:10) to identify them which the "Children of Judah" and "the Children of Israel" (Hosea 1:10-11; 2:23).
The Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah understands "you have multiplied the nation" (Is. 9:3) to refer to Paul "the proclaiming was multiplied, through the Goodnews of the emissary Paul... to the most distant tribes". Therefore the ancient Nazarenes understood the "Gentiles" to whom Paul primarily directed his message with the Ephraimite "Gentiles" of Isaiah 9:1-4 and with "the most distant tribes".
This comment in the Nazarene Commentary on Isaiah makes it clear that the Ancient Sect of Nazarene Judaism held that Paul was an emissary to the Ephraimites.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Discussion carried over from the other HRV thread.
I don't believe I was arguing that before Messiah's death Gentiles were just fuel for gehenna. What I was discussing was that they did not have access into the Holy of Holies. That is different. That is High Priest access. Reserved for once a year access for the chief priest of the Levites.
Your examples show God's heart for others not of the nation of Israel through OT times. They are accurate. Others I can think of are God protecting the Philistines and their army prospering when David was hiding out from Saul. Moses married an Ethiopian woman.
The illustration and teaching of the torn veil are that God does not desire a barrier between Himself and His children. It only has been in place there due to the hardness of their hearts. He desires His children to know Him face to face as Moses did. And He provided a plan, an atonement sacrifice, a scapegoat who was pure without blemish to be killed to atone for the sins of all who would accept the Messiah. Whether Jew or Gentile.
I suppose in one sense you could consider all Gentiles among "the most distant tribes". They are spoken of as a branch grafted in on a tree.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
One other question regarding the eternal nature of the Torah. What of all of the laws that pertain more to civil government that are handled currently by secular government as opposed to spiritual leadership? What of dietary laws?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
Well the Theocracy does not exist and will not exist again until Messiah returns, so we are not authorized to carry out penalties. As a result death was replaced by disfellowshipment. That was the case in Yeshua's day as well.
Other than that I am not sure what you mean.
The dietary laws are for all generations forever, just as the whole Torah is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Now there's something TWI is good at.
So Levitical law in the Torah is eternal. What about all of the laws regarding sacrifice? Do we still offer up a lamb of the first year, and bring it to the Levites?
Do we still sprinkle blood on our door openings as part of the Passover?
One challenge with upholding the letter of the law is that it was originally revealed in a much different day and time and society. What laws govern the use of the Internet, for example? Automobiles? Pollution? Cloning?
This is an issue with law. Certainly the heart and intent of God with respect to His children remains unchanged. In that I see the Torah as eternal truth. However when you have actual physical details to carry out to uphold it, then it starts becoming subject to man's intervention. Like you mentioned about death being replaced by disfellowship. A man made that determination. Another one will make similar determinations about the appropriate replacement for blood on door jambs, and on and on, including automobiles, pollution, cloning, the Internet, dancing. The inherent problem is not eternal truth. It is man.
You see that's how the generational evolution of the Way International has gone. One dynamic charlatan with a degree mill doctorate specializing in homiletics, a bunch of hippies, the post Vietnam free love era, then people growing up and it turning gradually more and more into legalism. Many naieve and excited at the start, and a few left trying to protect their little plot of land and positions at the latter end.
Jesus / Yeshua came to fulfill the law, to complete the law. He encapsulated all of the 10 commandments into two - love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, and your neighbor as yourself. He is the law now, not the blood we sprinkle on a door jamb.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
We keep the Torah that can be kept. The Torah requires animal sacrifices be made at the appointed place (the Temple) so until the Temple is rebuilt we cannot make these. However the original followers of Yeshua continued to make them. Hebrews teaches that the offerings continued each year as a remembrance (Heb. 11:2-2). Paul made offerings at the Temple long after Yeshua's death (Acts 21:17-26/Num. 6:13-21; Acts 24:17-18 see also Acts 18:18/Num 6:13-21). And the offerings will be made at the Millennial Temple (Ezek. 43:18-27). BTW there was no standing Temple in the days of Daniel, yet he was Torah Observant.
Matt. 5:17 Think not that I have come to abolish the Torah or the Prophets, I have come not to abolish, but to fulfill. – This is the only passage from the New Testament which is actually quoted, or more correctly paraphrased, in the Talmud. In the Talmud a certain Nazarene Judge is cited as having quoted the following phrase from a book called the ”The Good News”.
I have not come to take away from the Torah of Moshe
and I have not come to add to the Torah of Moshe
(b.Shabbat 116)
This passage refers to a Torah command which forbids adding to, or subtracting from, the Torah (Deut. 4:2; 12:32). The Tanak states clearly that the Torah would never be abolished:
...it shall be a statute forever
to their generations.... (Ex. 27:21)
...it shall be a statute forever to him
and his seed after him. (Ex. 28:43)
...a statute forever... (Ex. 29:28)
...it shall be a statute forever to them,
to him and to his seed
throughout their generations. (Ex. 30:21)
It is a sign between me
and the children of Israel forever. (Ex. 31:17)
There is no shortage of passages in the Torah which specify that the Torah will not be abolished but will be for all generations forever. (For more see: Lev. 6:18, 22; 7:34, 36; 10:9, 15; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 41; 24:3; Num. 10:8; 15:15; 18:8, 11, 19, 23; 19:10 and Deut. 5:29)
Moreover the Psalmist writes:
Your word is truth from the beginning:
and every one of your righteous judgments endures forever.
(Psalm 119:160)
Furthermore the Tanak tells us that the Torah is not to be changed or taken away from:
You shall not add to the word
which I command you,
neither shall you diminish a thing from it,
that you may keep the commandments
of YHWH your God which I command you.
(Deut 4:2)
Whatever thing I command you,
observe to do it: you shall not add thereto,
nor diminish from it.
(Deut. 12:32)
Similarly Paul writes:
Do we make the Torah of no effect by trust?
Absolutely not! On the contrary, we uphold the Torah!
(Rom. 3:31)
Despite the fact that David was saved by faith alone (Rom. 4:5-8) he loved the Torah and delighted in it (Ps. 119: 97, 113, 163). Paul (Paul) also delighted in the Torah (Rom. 7:22) and called it "holy, just and good." (Rom. 7:12). There is nothing wrong with the Torah that God should want to abolish or destroy it, in fact both the Tanak and the New Scriptures call the Torah "perfect" (Ps. 19:7; James 1:25). The Torah is even called in the New Testament "the Torah of Messiah" (Gal. 6:2). To say that the Torah was not forever and is not for all generations, is to call YHWH a liar.
Abolish/destroy…fulfill – In Hebrew and Aramaic these are idiomatic expressions. To “fulfil” the Torah means to keep and teach the Torah according to its true meaning. To “destroy” the Torah is to teach its meaning in correctly and to violate Torah. Yeshua came to teach the true meaning of Torah, thus in 5:21f he will teach the true meaning of various commandments of the Torah.
“love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength,”
This is nothing new… this is what the Totah says (Deut. 6:4)
and your neighbor as yourself.
This is also nothing new, it is a commandment in the Torah (Lev. 19:18)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
I suppose one of the problems I have is that I have some relatives that are Jewish, and in a rather strict orthodox sense (their words). I also have some relative s that are Catholic. I remember how much fun it was when they got together - <grin> Love wasn't a good description of what I saw taking place. I learned that the Law was simply a stupid set of codes that was outdated and Illegal anyways. What if a stoning was required by the law,... due to the circumstances? I don't see a lot of stonings these days. So there are some laws that Jews simply ignore But offer them a BLT and you'd think the sky had fallen! The Law is just whatever in the heck they want it to be, and this goes way beyond a few of my relatives, a long way beyond.... And the ones that strive to do every single thing that they can are usually too poor to do anything they'd like that was legal, and oddly sinned with about the same regularity anyways. I could write a book about some of the funny things I've noticed.
Anyways I have a question for James, and it's an honest one, based in my simple curiosity.
How stringently do you believe the law should be followed? You probably know the law a lot better than I and what all it entails, But I think you also believe that Jesus was the Messiah, and you're aware of the troubles that were caused in the early church by disagreements over how much legalism was healthy for the believers. We have a record of Jesus telling Peter to eat some unclean food, post ascension and admonitions not to use the liberty they had in the law (somehow) as an occasion to the flesh.
But it seems to me that you are saying that there is no real change here, while there obviously has been some. I don't see Jews stoning sinners that the law would support it on. Or do they in secret, stone people to death still? ...following the law. yes, it's an extreme example and no I don't see them doing stonings, yet that is the law and there are other laws they seem to have shoved under the table, I'm sure you can think of a short list pretty easily yourself. But I'd like to hear your views on the balance that that this has become and whether or not that's healthy or correct. And you are in a rather unique position to see things a bit from each side. I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter,... what you know. and I'll not comment afterward in any negative sense, after all, I'm asking a favor of you here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
If I can add a "yep, me too.."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
I will try to respond to the rest of this timorrow, as I am about to head off to bed for th rnight.
However you mentioned Yeshua telling Paul to eat unkosher food.
I assume you refer to the common misunderstand of Acts 10 (though this is Peter/Kefa) not Paul.
The following is my commentary on Acts. unfortunately the Aramaic fonts appear as "gibberish" English letters:
10:1-2 Now there was one man in Caesarea; a centurion, and his name was Cornelius; from the band of soldiers that was called Italian. And he was righteous and feared Eloah, he and his entire house. And he did much tzedakah among the people, and all the time was entreating Eloah.
This is probably the same Centurion who once came to Yeshua seeking healing for his servant (see Mt. 8:5-13 = Lk. 7:1-10). If so, this is he of whom the people told Yeshua:
…he is worthy that you do this for him:
For he loves our people,
and also has built for us a synagogue.
(Lk. 7:4b-5)
“feared Eloah” )hl) Nm )wh lxdw literally “feared he from Eloah”. The Greek has foboumenoj ton Qeon “feared Eloah”. This may have been a technical term for Gentiles who sere semi-converts to Judaism, who accepted the Noachide laws but had not yet been circumcised into the Mosaic Covenant. (See Acts 13:16)
10:3 at nine hours into the day – See comment to Acts 3:1
10:9b …Shim’on went up to the roof to pray, at the sixth hour.
See comments to Acts 3:1
10:11 and a kind of garment being held by four corners,
and it was like a great linen cloth, The implication is that the garment was a tallit (prayer shawl) being lowered by the tzitzit on the four corners (Numbers 15:37-41).
10:12 And there were in it, all four-footed animals, and creeping things of the earth, and birds of heaven. Later we are told that these animals represent the three Gentiles who came to see Kefa (Acts 11:5-12). In 1Enoch 85-90 these animals are used to represent various groups of Gentiles.
10:13 arise, kill and eat – Kefa was not being unstructed to arise kill and eat the animals mentioned in verse 12. First of all this was not real, it was a vision. Secondly we know from Acts 11:5-12 that the Animals represented Gentiles. Kefa was not being told to kill the Gentiles. Instead he was being instructed to greet them as guests by arisng, killing an animal and eating (see for example Gen. 18:1-8 when Avrham greeted three men as guests).
10:14 I have never eaten anything that is defiled (bysm) or unclean ()m+) – The two words here in the Aramaic have different shades of meaning. bysm or as it appears in the dialect of the Jerusalem Talmud b)sm is used in the phrase b)sm )® “defiled land” referring to land outside of Israel, the land of the Gentiles (Y.Kil, IX, 32c). Whereas )m+ refers to that which is unclean, such as unkosher food.
10:15 That which Eloah has cleansed do not regard as defiled. Only the word “defiled” is repeated in this verse (see the previous verse). The voice does not say not to call food unclean, but not to call that which the food represents (Gentiles) “defiled” (see comments to verses 12, 12 and 14).
10:25-26 And while Shim’on was entering, Cornelius met him, and fell down; worshipped at his feet. And Shim’on raised him up and said to him, Stand up! I also am a son of man. Kefa did not respond with “Kiss my ring, I’m the first Pope!”
10:28 And he said to them, You know that it is not lawful, for a Jewish man to associate with a strange man, who is not a son of his kindred: The word “lawful” here (spm) refers not to the Torah, but to something that is allowed or permitted as a custom. strange ()yrkwn) man the term is used in the Targums to refer to foreigners, for example Targum Onkelos uses this word to render the phrase “you may not set a foreigner over you” in Deut. 17:15.
but Eloah showed me, that I should not say concerning a man, that he is unclean or defiled. As shown in the comments to Acts 10:11-15.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
Nah,... I wrote Peter, and the post hasn't been edited, and thanks for answwering that part.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
James Trimm
Sorry, my mistake.
As for capitol punishment, we do not have that authority any longer, and will not until the Messiah returns to re-establish the Kingdom of Israel theocracy.
We keep the Torah that we can keep, so in the absence of the Temple we cannot make animal sacrifices until it is rebuilt.
Paul is greatly misunderstood as having taught that the Torah is not for today. I have met a great many who feel uncomfortable with his writings. Some of these have even, like the Ebionites of ancient times, removed Paul's from their canon (Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 3:27:4). This belief that Yeshua may not have abolished the Torah, but that Paul did, has been propagated since ancient times. The "Toldot Yeshu" for example, an ancient hostile Rabbinic parody on the Gospels and Acts, accuses Paul of contradicting Yeshua on this very issue (Toldot Yeshu 6:16-41; 7:3-5). At least one modern Dispensationalist, Maurice Johnson, taught that the Messiah did not abolish the Torah, but that Paul did several years after the fact. He writes:
Apparently God allowed this system of Jewish
ordinances to be practiced about thirty years
after Christ fulfilled it because in His patience,
God only gradually showed the Jews how it was
that His program was changing.... Thus it was
that after God had slowly led the Christians
out of Jewish religion He had Paul finally
write these glorious, liberating truths.
(Saved by "Dry" Baptism! ; a pamphlet by
Maurice Johnson; pp. 9-10)
Kefa warns us in the Scriptures that Paul's writings are difficult to understand. He warns us saying:
...in which are some things hard to understand,
which those who are untaught and unstable
twist to their own destruction,
as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.
(2Pt. 3:15-16)
Paul knew that his teachings were being twisted, he mentions this in Romans, saying:
And why not say, "Let us do evil that good may come"?
-- as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm
that we say." (Rom. 3:8)
Paul elaborates on this slanderous twist of his teachings, saying:
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin
that grace may abound? Certainly not!..."
(Rom. 6:1-2)
and
What then? Shall we sin because we are not
under the Torah but under grace? Certainly not!"
(Rom. 6:15).
So then, Paul was misunderstood as teaching that because we
are under grace, we need not observe the Torah.
Upon his visit to Jerusalem in Acts 21 Paul was confronted with this slanerous twist of his teachings. He was told:
You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews
there are who believe, and they are all zealous
for the Torah; but they have been informed about
you that you teach all the Jews who are among
the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they
ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk
according to the customs.
(Acts 21:20-21)
In order to prove that this was nothing more than slander, Paul takes
the nazarite vow and goes to make offerings (sacrifices) at the Temple (Acts 21:22-26 & Num. 6:13-21) demonstrating that he himself kept the Torah (Acts 21:24). Paul did and said many things to prove that he both kept and taught the Torah. He:
• circumcised Timothy (Acts 16:1-3)
• took the nazarite vow (Acts 18:18; 21:17-26)
• taught and observed the Jewish holy days such as:
• Passover (Acts 20:6; 1Cor. 5:6-8; 11:17-34)
• Shavuot (Pentecost) (Acts 20:16; 1Cor. 16:8)
• fasting on Yom Kippur (Acts 27:9)
• and even performed animal sacrifices
in the Temple (Acts 21:17-26/Num. 6:13-21;
Acts 24:17-18)
Among his more notable statements on the subject are:
• "Neither against the Jewish Torah,
nor against the Temple, nor against Caesar
have I offended in anything at all." (Acts 25:8)
• "I have done nothing against our people
or the customs of our fathers." (Acts 28:17)
• "...the Torah is holy and the commandment
is holy and just and good." (Rom. 7:12)
• "Do we then nullify the Torah through faith?
May it never be! On the contrary, we maintain
the Torah." (Rom. 3:31).
Was Paul a Hypocrite?
Being confronted with the various acts and statements of Paul which support the Torah, many of the "Torah is not for today" teachers accuse Paul of being hypocritical. Charles Ryrie, for example, footnotes Acts 21:24 in his Ryrie Study Bible calling Paul a "middle of the road
Christian" for performing such acts. Another writer, M.A. DeHaan wrote an entire book entitled "Five Blunders of Paul" which characterizes these acts as "blunders." "These teachers of lawlessness" credit Paul as the champion of their doctrine, and then condemn him for not teaching their doctrine. If Paul was really a hypocrite, could he honestly have condemned hypocrisy so fervently (see Gal. 2:11-15). Consider some of his own words:
For now do I persuade the sons of men or Eloah? Or do I seek to please the sons of men? For if until now I had pleased the sons of men, I would not have been a servant of the Messiah.
(Gal. 1:10 HRV)
And you know, my brothers, that our entrance unto you was not in vain,
but first we suffered and were dishonored, as you know, in Philippi, and then with great struggle we spoke to you with the boldness of our Eloah the good news of the Messiah.
For our exhortation was not from deception nor from impurity nor with treachery.
But as we were approved of Eloah to be entrusted with his Good News, thus we speak, not so as to please the sons of men, but Eloah, who searches our hearts.
For we never used flattering speech, as you know, nor a pretext of greediness; Eloah [is] witness.
(1Thes. 2:1-5 HRV)
If Paul was a hypocrite, he must have been one of the slickest con-men in history!
Edited by James TrimmLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.