Home |
Was Paul Confused About The Law? By Clyde Brown Theologians
over the centuries have embraced Paul as the great emancipator from the
law of God. His letter, they claim, especially Galatians, make the case
that the law of Christ had rendered the law of Moses null and void. Is
there a difference between the two laws? Has Moses’ law, the Torah,
been Superceded by a new “Christian” law? To find the answer
to these questions we must turn to the historical debate the early church
had on this very issue. On the Day of Pentecost of Acts 2, when the Holy Spirit was poured out, those from the Diaspora included Jews and proselytes from Asia Minor (Acts 2:5-13). Those who received the message of Peter and were baptized would have had some understanding of the gospel and carried that back to the cities in Asia Minor. Far more Jews lived in the Diaspora than in Judea. Paul formed the church from the synagogues in Asia Minor. Attending the synagogues were the Jews, gentiles who had become proselytes through circumcision, and other God-fearing gentiles who had accepted the God of Israel but stopped short of circumcision. The gentile who had accepted the God of Israel but had not been circumcised was considered only partly clean until he had undergone the full circumcision rite. The women gentile God-fearers were to keep all of the rites within the circumcision covenant, of course, excluding circumcision. The churches Paul established in Galatia were made up of believing Jews, proselytes and uncircumcised God-fearers. To share in the commonwealth of Israel according to the laws of Moses (laws of God), the gentile had to be circumcised and keep all of the laws of Moses. In so doing the gentile by religion and way of life was considered the same as a home-born Israelite. Paul’s letter to the Galatians came after the famine-relief visit in (Acts 11:27-30) and before the Jerusalem council of Acts 15. During the famine visit some in the Jerusalem church were calling for Titus, a Greek, to be circumcised. Titus had accompanied Paul from Antioch with relief supplies. Paul stood steadfast in refusing to circumcise Titus. The apostles Peter, James and John extended the right hand of fellowship to Paul without demanding circumcision for Titus. Although the circumcision question was raised during the famine-relief visit, no formal decree resulted. The written Torah – The oral Torah Another historical fact to consider is the added “works of the law” that were seen as a fence around the written Torah. To protect the Torah from being broken, a multitude of extra commandments called the oral Torah were made law by those who sat in Moses’ seat of judgment (Matthew 23:1-6). Although Jesus referred to many of these added commandments as “burdens” upon the people, the Sanhedrin court was the extended seat of Moses, and the disciples were to keep them. After the resurrection of Jesus it becomes clear that Moses’ seat was now the seat (throne) of the risen Christ. Authority to bind and loose The seat of Moses was the seat of judgment to bind and loose according to the laws within the Torah, the first five books in our Old Testament scriptures. The judicial system that God first gave to Moses was for the purpose of making judgments within the law. Yet the Pharisees who sat on the Sanhedrin council to judge the cases brought before them began to make law, defining how the written Torah laws should be observed. For instance, the Torah forbade work on the Sabbath but gave no specific details of what constitutes work. The Sanhedrin made case law from the bench for what constitutes work down to the smallest detail. Nothing was left to individual judgment. Not all oral laws were burdens, but enough were to inspire Jesus to comment that they were the commandments of men. The apostle Peter’s approach at the Jerusalem council was to comment on the same commandments of men, those that should not be placed upon the gentiles. Paul’s letter to the Galatians came after the Antioch incident and before the Acts 15 council. Paul did not have access to the decree from the council at the time he wrote Galatians, yet, in view of the times, Peter’s comments are important to an understanding of Paul’s complaints against the Galatians. At the council Peter said: “Now therefore why tempt you God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear” (Acts 15:10). Added burdens The Greek for the English “were” is in the aorist past tense, meaning that Peter and the other apostles were no longer bearing the burdensome commandments the Sanhedrin had added to the written Torah. The Judaizers who had come into the Jerusalem church were zealous for the law, both the written and oral laws added by the Sanhedrin. The decree that the God-fearing gentile did not have to be circumcised and keep the laws of Moses was the same as Paul’s contention even before the Jerusalem conference. In other words, Paul’s conviction presaged what was decided at the conference, and therefore expressed in this letter he wrote just before the conference. In his letter Paul begins by stating that He is an apostle not of man but of Jesus and the Father, who resurrected Jesus. Having established from whence his apostleship came, in Galatians 1:6-7 Paul marvels that the Galatians were so soon removed from the one (Paul himself) who had been instrumental in their calling into the grace of Christ unto another, perverted gospel. Paul declared that he did not receive his gospel from men (verses 11-12); he received it from Christ. In the remaining verses of chapter 1 Paul recounts his visit to Jerusalem after three years from his encounter with the risen Christ. Chapter 2 begins with events 14 years after his encounter with the risen Jesus, when Paul goes up to Jerusalem because of a revelation. Prophets from Jerusalem Prophets from Jerusalem had come to Antioch. One of them, Agabus, stood up to prophesy that a great famine was to occur. The disciples from Antioch gathered up supplies and sent Barnabas and Paul to Jerusalem with provisions for the saints. Paul took Titus, a Greek, with him, so the Judaizers pressed for Titus’s circumcision. It appears that Paul was thinking that the Judaizers had dogged his trail and therefore had made their way to Galatia. He begins to explain the Antioch incident in which the Judaizers who had come from the Jerusalem church caused Peter to remove himself from table fellowship with the believing gentiles. The issue was not the food set on the table; it was the Jewish believers sitting at the table with uncircumcised gentile believers. Here are two things we should keep in mind: 1) In New
Testament times the meal was consecrated to God by thanksgiving and holy,
and no unclean gentile should be at the table of fellowship. Peter, who had been sent to the God-fearing Cornelius (Acts 10), knew this wasn’t proper, since God had pronounced the God-fearing gentile clean—even though uncircumcised. Paul accuses Peter of playing the hypocrite because Peter lived, as does the gentile. As Paul knew, so did Peter, that by grace through faith both Jew and gentile are justified in Christ and not by the works of the law, in this case the law of circumcision. The Judaizers were persuading the gentile Galatians that they must be circumcised and keep the laws of Moses. The Jews knew the Torah was from God, but, since it was delivered to Moses to administer, the Torah was also considered the Law of Moses. Paul is clear that the gentile is not to come under the circumcision covenant, considered the Law of Moses. It appears that Paul is teaching a law-free gospel. In fact, that is precisely what the later gentile church fathers gathered from Paul’s writings. But is that so, or did the later Gentile church misread Paul? Paul states clearly; the law will judge the believer (Romans 2:12-13). Paul goes even farther and states that faith establishes and upholds the law (Romans 3:31). Paul inconsistent? Paul has been accused of being inconsistent and contradictory. If the gentiles are not to come under the Law of Moses, yet they will be judged without partiality as those under the Law, how is Paul’s teaching to be explained in ways that are not contradictory? What is the problem with the Law of Moses, which is in fact the law of God? The key to Paul’s teaching is found in a profound statement to the followers of Christ in Corinth: “To them that are without law, [I became] as without law, being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ” (1 Corinthians 9:21). The law to Christ is the law of faith. Salvation is by the grace of God, through the faith of Christ, and our faith in God through Jesus Christ. When we interpret correctly what Paul is stating here, what appeared as contradictory is coherent and consistent. The key is found in determining when Paul is speaking of the Torah law as under Moses, and the Torah law as amended by Jesus Christ fulfillment. Does being under the law of faith to Christ make void the righteousness of law of God in the first five book of the Hebrew Bible? God forbid Paul would say. How we would know sin if the commandments of God did not define sin? Is salvation
by the grace of God and the faith of Christ in opposition to the laws
of God? Where Paul handles the grace and law question as two subjects
separate and yet interrelated, traditional Christianity has turned the
laws compliment to grace by faith into opposition, and confused both grace
and the law. Does the
gentile being without the circumcision law of Moses for gaining entrance
into the new covenant in Christ by grace through faith, without law to
God? Paul states “NOT” without law to God. Then the only logical
conclusion one can draw is getting into the covenant by grace through
faith, must be followed by maintaining ones position in the covenant,
is obedience to the law of God. Grace through faith places the believer
into the covenant, and disobedience can take the same one out of the covenant.
Torah from Moses to Jesus Our received
New Testament comes to us in Greek, where the word for law is “nomos.
“ Therefore we cannot always tell when Paul is speaking of the Torah
as in the circumcision covenant of Moses. Nor can we always tell when
it is the Torah as in Christ. But as a rule of thumb, when Paul is negative,
it is how the law is being used, and always positive when the law of God
is used as it was intended. Also, the “works of the law” that were added by those who sat in Moses seat, the commandments of men, are excluded from the Torah in Christ. And even righteous deeds of the law do not justify for entrance into the covenant of grace through faith. Measure of righteousness The Galatians were being persuaded by Judaizers to come under the Law of Moses. Not only that, but the “works of the law” were being used as a measure of righteousness, as justifying salvation. Paul’s
teaching was that belief and faith in God through Jesus Christ is accounted
as righteousness, and not the “works of the law,” for the
“works of the law” justifies no man. If the works of the law
do not justify for salvation, then what does the righteous deeds of the
law justify. The righteousness for entrance into the new covenant of Christ
is by grace through faith alone. The righteous deeds of the Torah, the
royal Law of Love, justify reward within the kingdom of God, and justify
staying in the new covenant. The Torah under Christ replaces the Torah under Moses. Christ replaces Moses as the bearer of the Torah. In Moses, God is the God of Israel only. In Christ, the world is reconciled to God; God is the God of all who believe, Jew or gentile. For Paul the gentile Galatians were not to come under the circumcision Law of Moses because in doing so they would depart from the Torah as in Christ, who justifies us apart from the law. Justifications for salvation, and justification for reward and maintaining ones position in the covenant are two different subjects in Paul’s teaching. Under grace through faith Paul uses
a Greek word mistranslated in most of our Bibles as “observe.”
The Greek implies meticulous, and scrupulous, watching in great carefulness
to all of the “works of the law,” and that as a measure of
righteousness for salvation. The same word is used in Luke 20:20 when
spies were sent to watch Jesus to catch him breaking one the commandments
of men. The Judaizers were leading the Galatians to the works of the law,
the commandments of men. Not only that, the Galatians were being taught
that the “works of the law” must be kept to justify salvation.
The later
gentile church fathers, apart from the council of the Jewish believers
and with anti-Semitism in their minds and hearts, focused on the days,
months, times, and years, rather than how the days were being kept as
works of the law and as a measure of righteousness for salvation. Salvation
cannot come by the law because sin brings death and no man but one escaped
sin, that Man Jesus Christ. We can be assured that Paul did not forbid the observance of the Sabbath or feast days, which are as necessary as table fellowship of the believing Jews and gentiles remaining as one in Christ. The separation of the gentile church from the Jewish believers can be historically confirmed no earlier than the second century of the Christian era. Gentiles and the Sabbath All of our New Testament that would eventually become part of the canon was written before the close of the first century, and Paul’s writings as well as the book of Acts reveal no split of the church between the gentiles and the Jewish believers. The council at Jerusalem, the Acts 15 council, was convened for the purpose of deciding whether the gentile had to be circumcised and keep the Torah of Moses. The decision was that such was not the case, because the God-fearing gentile was cleansed by God and given the Holy Spirit as a seal of the covenant. James had pointed back to the prophet Amos (Amos 9:12-13) as a proof text that God would choose out of the gentiles a people for His name. Requirements for table fellowship were set in a decree, and God-fearing gentiles were to continue, as was their custom, to attend the synagogues on the Sabbaths. Even as late as 64-65 the book of Acts still finds the God-fearing gentile honoring the Sabbath. The only conclusion that renders Paul’s teaching coherent and consistent is the realization that his negativity is always toward the Torah as observed in Moses, which excluded the gentiles. He positively affirms observance of the Torah as observed in Christ, not for justification to be in Christ, but for reward and staying in Christ. Even in Christ the Torah is not to be taken as a measure for righteousness that justifies salvation. The just shall live by faith, and the righteousness of Christ is imputed to the believer. In terms of the Torah in Christ the believer will be judged by the Torah for reward now and in the world to come. It is by grace through faith that the believer should obey the royal law of love as reflected in the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments were considered one indivisible unit with 10 points. To break one of the 10 points is to break all, since all were one indivisible unit. James explains the concept well in the second chapter of his letter, verse 10-11. Since the Ten Commandments are one package, one unit with ten points, to break one break’s the unit, which is considered as one indivisible, and therefore it, is as though all ten were broken. Something the church fathers missed When we apply the historical context to Paul’s letter to the Galatians, we come to conclusions different from those of the gentile church fathers. The Galatians were beginning to keep the works of the law in Moses, including the added works by those who sat in Moses seat. What was missed by the gentile church fathers is the gentile was not without law to God, but under the law to Christ. They abolished the Sabbath and feast days and considered keeping them anathema, and for the Jewish believer to join with the gentile church, the Torah except for select commandments were scrapped. What can we say, then, for the Sabbaths and feast days in Christ? If a memorial
to God having the death angel pass over the children of Israel was important
to remember, how much more the Passover from death to life in Jesus Christ?
If Jesus is the firstborn of the new creation, and it was important to
remember the Sabbath rest in the old creation, how much more important
is our Sabbath rest in Christ, who makes us into a new creation in mind
and spirit?
|
Copyright
© 2006, Sound a Trumpet |