Pillars of Heaven: The Ethical Dilemma of Religion without Torah

In a recent conversation I challenged someone to provide either a theological or historical foundation for the claim that Christians need to be “good” people.  The topic arose because my friend remarked that her church taught that being saved and going to heaven was the true goal of Man’s spiritual quest.  Once salvation was assured, life’s objective was accomplished.  Subsequent behavior didn’t change the outcome.  After all, according to this line of thought, this world is passing away because it is full of sin and decay.  It will be replaced with a new world modeled after the heavenly kingdom where there will be no sin.  Entry into the new world doesn’t depend on anything that a person “earns” here.  It is simply a matter of God’s grace.  Therefore, once assured of citizenship in the new world to come, life here is merely a “waiting room” experience and what happens in the waiting room has no effect on the final outcome.

I challenged this line of reasoning, pointing out that if it is true then there is no real justification for ethical behavior other than social expediency.  My challenge was both theological and historical.  In my view, once the Christian religion abandoned the perspective of Torah and the requirement of Torah observance, it undercut its own theological and ethical foundation.  In other words, Christianity’s implicit anti-Semitism forced it to find a different foundation for ethical claims, a foundation that was not based on the “Jewish” faith and therefore not part of the revelation of God to Moses.  Both theologically and historically, the Church took deliberate steps to separate itself from the Jewish revelation.  But the consequence left the Church without the Law, the Writings and the Prophets.  That meant that the Church had to base its ethical teaching on the writings of the apostles and Paul.  This could have been satisfactory if it were not for the additional claim that Paul taught that grace replaced Torah obedience.  Under the doctrine of grace, ethical requirements become the outworking of the Spirit following conversion, but since this is an entirely inward and personal matter, the lack of outward ethical behavior is no longer an indicator of the absence of a heavenly guarantee.  In other words, if I believe that I am “saved” on the basis of a one-time declaration of the forgiveness of my sins through the acknowledgment of Jesus as God’s Son, then my subsequent behavior, whether good or bad by societal standards, is irrelevant.  God and I have an agreement.  What I do after that agreement is in place doesn’t really affect the final destination.

Let’s examine the theology of this idea.  This situation occurs because the Church does not accept the idea that God actually requires specific behaviors in this world.  If I accept Torah as God’s revelation for living here, then I become obligated to live up to this divine standard.  This standard provides a foundation for subsequent ethical behavior, a foundation not based in societal mores but based on the will of God as Creator of the universe.  The Church rejects this idea because it points to the gift of salvation (Luther’s idea of imputed righteousness).  It claims that salvation is never a matter of earning God’s favor and therefore any theological requirement for particular behaviors must be dismissed.  But this confuses the difference between demonstrating worthiness and enjoying God’s gracious invitation.  Let me explain.

There is no doubt whatsoever that favor with God is not a function of human effort.  This is just as true in the Tanakh as it is in the apostolic writings.  Paul and the prophets, including Moses, are uniform in this view.  God acts with favor toward men because He loves us, not because we earn His kindness.  In Hebrew, this is the concept found in the word ḥēn.  Yeshua, Paul, Moses and Elijah all agree.

But an announcement of favor and an invitation to participate in the Kingdom is not the same as the consequent obligations that are voluntarily embraced when a person accepts God’s favor.  In other words, the offer of salvation is free but the responsibility of demonstrating worthiness subsequent to accepting the offer is not free.  ḥēn entails ḥesed.  And ḥesed  demands ethical behavior aligned with Torah.  ḥesed is a way of life.  It is not optional.  It is the expression of gratitude and thanksgiving for God’s unmerited favor and its absence is proof that the invitation was either not accepted or the person’s subsequent acts show he was not worthy.  That Yeshua taught this same theology can be seen in the parable of the great debtor.  Membership has its obligations.

When the Christian religion attempted to justify its existence apart from Judaism, when it no longer espoused the way of life revealed in Torah, it was forced to find a justification for its ethical position based only on New Testament teachings.  But this became impossible.  As Gaston observes, if the New Testament is Jewish through and through, there is no biblical justification for the Christian religion.

Now let’s look at the historical record.  The Church saw the Jewish way of life as an attempt to earn righteousness.  It viewed Torah as “salvation by works.”  Misunderstanding the connection between ḥēn and ḥesed, the Church threw the baby out with the bathwater.  By rejecting everything associated with the Jewish way of life as “works righteousness,” the Church was left with only the writings of the New Testament as its foundation for ethical justification.  But the New Testament gospels are entirely Jewish.  Jesus was a Jew and he lived according to Jewish standards, so none of his “Jewishness” could be incorporated into Christian doctrine since Christianity rejected the Jewish way of life.  The Church argued that after the crucifixion Jesus established a “new” covenant of grace, but any accurate examination of the life of Jesus clearly shows that he not only practiced the Jewish way of life but actually endorsed it.  Whatever occurred after the resurrection was insufficient to build an ethical foundation.

That left Paul.  Christianity, following Augustine, viewed Paul as a convert and an ideal model for God’s intention for all Jews.  Christianity taught that Paul overturned the need for Torah observance by introducing the radical concept of grace (as interpreted by Luther).  Grace was free of any and all conditions.  It had to be because the Church adopted Augustine’s (and subsequently Luther’s) idea of total depravity expressed in the doctrine of sinful nature.  Since Man was incapable of any righteous act in his unrepentant state, no human effort carried any heavenly consequence.  It had to be all God’s work.  Augustine was also a Platonist.  His Platonic dualism created a split in the universe.  The spiritual realm existed in heaven, a place where there was no corruption, no decay and no moral impurity.  Only the Good, the True and the Beautiful were found in Heaven.  But earth was a different matter.  The very existence of physical matter on earth entailed decay, corruption and sin.  The physical world was not only essentially flawed, it was also the prison of the true essence of Man, the soul.  The objective of life on earth was to escape with decaying world by transitioning to the perfect spiritual realm.  Since the body was physical, it was also flawed.  It would be left behind when the soul immigrated to heaven.

Augustine’s view of sinful nature coupled with his Platonic dualism set the stage for the Church’s declaration that heaven was the real goal of human beings and that no human effort on earth had any effect on the soul’s migration to heaven.  When the Church claimed Paul as the biblical proponent of these Platonic ideas, it found a Scriptural justification for bifurcated reality.

But now the Church was left with a terrible consequence.  Christianity threw out Torah on the grounds that it was Jewish (and therefore superseded) and it was anchored in human effort in this world.  This left the Church with the logical consequence that if only the spiritual realm mattered, life on earth really had no eternal consequences.  This meant that life on earth was whatever men made it to be.  Life here was merely a test and all that was really required was to get through it.  This logically entailed that the Church became a proponent of lawlessness.  With regard to Judaism and pagans, the historical record actually confirms the Church’s disregard for any sort of ethical behavior.  But, of course, this leads directly to chaos.  Therefore, Christianity was forced to proclaim the necessity of proper ethical behavior without a biblical foundation.  You might recognize this in Kant’s effort to establish religion on the basis of reason alone.  Eventually, this problem was resolved in the “love” ethics, but under the surface the idea that ethics can be based on loving others is nothing more than a reflection of the current society.  The reason such a claim works is because the society requires some form of respect for other human beings in order to operate, but history clearly shows that this loose view of ethical behavior is subject to societal pressures and altered accordingly.  Consider the Church’s role in the Inquisition or the Holocaust.  “Loving others” became the justification for torture and genocide.

Today the Church teaches its parishioners that they should live upright and moral lives.  But if we press hard, we soon discover that “upright and moral” is a function of social mores and is altered according to society’s needs.  For example, what is the proper ethical stance regarding homosexuality or same-sex marriages?  The Church has no uniform voice in the matter.  In fact, some churches actively endorse these behaviors.  Abortion is another example of the same disparity.  Christianity has no uniform ethics because it no longer has a revealed code of conduct.  In fact, even if the Church claims endorsement of the “fundamentals” in the Ten Commandments, it reveals immediately its own arbitrary posture.  After all, it systematically ignores the fourth commandment.  If this is the Church’s posture, why are the others “eternal” requirements?  Logically, if one is no longer needed, the others fall into the same category.  Because the Church reflects the cultural ethical bias, it endorses some of the biblical commandments but not all of them.  The Church is ethically pragmatic just as society is ethically pragmatic.  It endorses what works, but its own theology screams that none of this really matters in the long run.

What may we conclude?  Both historically and biblically, once Torah was abandoned by Christian theology, the code of conduct for life on earth was reconstructed according to the culture of the time.  Coupled with Platonic dualism, Christianity taught that life on earth was merely the precursor to the perfect world of heaven and consequently ethical behavior here was arbitrary and pragmatic.  Here’s the challenge.  Ask an ordinary Christian believer why he should keep the Ten Commandments.  Point out the keeping the Sabbath is one of the eternal requirements.  Then ask him if keeping the commandments is a requirement for favor with God.  If he responds that God’s grace is the only necessary and sufficient condition for the favor of heaven, ask why he claims the commandments are needed.  If he suggests that the world wouldn’t work well without them, point out that this justification is entirely pragmatic and arbitrary and therefore subject to the cultural views of the age.  Ask for some biblical justification, some God-given reason why I should live now according to His will.  If he provides any justification at all, ask him why these behaviors are necessary if he is under “grace.”  See what happens.

 

 

Subscribe
Notify of
36 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
David F.

Skip,
One of the most informative, and well written posts on TW. I will certainly make sure I get this into as many hands as possible with your “ok”…?

Blessings
David

David F.

Yes. We are finding this certainly to be the case. In fact that was a topic of discussion in our Bible study last night. People are feeling compelled to want tell others but at the same time they simply want to ask people to come to our home Bible study group. My take is that asking them to come to the home Bible study group should not be the first step. It must begin with one on one time spent with others. This has been a grave mistake in our church cultures “evangelism”, that equates “evangelizing” with asking people to come to church vs. getting involved in someone’s life and letting them into yours. Why? Because that’s much easier and takes the weight off of me and puts it on the “church”.

On the same note, its truly amazing when someone is ready, it doesn’t take much. Its like the light switch is turned on and they all the sudden see clearly. Its a wonderful thing to watch it take place, when the Spirit breaths on the Word. The one great statement that most make is, “the Word of God isn’t confusing any more. There is continuity to it!”

So, don’t worry it will only go out to those who have reached the end and have crossed over or are ready to. Again thanks for speaking the truth.

Sherri

I am reminded of a past experience in traditional church. I was struggling – again – with the fact that what we were doing was not matching up with Scripture. We had invited a young couple attending seminary for sunday dinner. I made the comment that the “church” as defined as the body of Christ was exclusive. We were instructed to go out into the world and make disciples, not drag the filth of the world into the “church.” They reacted as if I had literally physically slapped them. We are also told to train up our own children in the nurture and admonition of YHVH and not send them to be instructed by the Philistines.

Many say they want truth, but when they are actually confronted with it, they excuse their current belief with the ethical foundation that makes them comfortable, the one that fits a self contrived system of relativity. Of course, there can be no absolutes in this, no Law/Torah, only ever changing graces. King David said it best – I will not offer YHVH that which costs me nothing.

wes

And…Wow,wow,wow. I was just talking to a friend about this. He said,”you don”t need any of this! Skips teaching) I already “have” it! Thanks Skip, I have been asking Dr. Shawn about this often. I also tried to explain this to the pastor of the church I went to. The elder asked…”where is your tithe going?”

Debra

Thank you! Answers a lot of questions

Tonya

Wow! Thanks Skip

Mark Beauvais

I couldn’t agree more, Skip! This is precisely why there are SO many doctrinal and sectarian divisions in the Christian world, and why such non-biblical positions such as “once saved, always saved” and “say the sinner’s prayer and be saved” are so prevalent within it.

CAROL MATTICE

Skip.. thank you for this declaration and clarification of HIS WORD.
With what I have in head and heart ; I agree with what you have said.
I am no scholar but it sits right with me due to the fact that I have personally found it to be true.
I am one that has been saved and am being saved and will be saved by the grace of GOD and I know that.
But I also see loud and clear as even today in my local congregation our Pastor said that we are NOT under the law.
Possibly he could have explained it a lot better but he left out the word CURSE from that scripture.
Many therefore are leaving the Torah or the the ten commandments and believing that because the curse has been removed that the law has to.
I have seen this understanding for some time but it did take me time as I do not have anyone in flesh that would journey with me on this.
I have JESUS and HE is opening it UP to me little by little that most definitely HE did not come to Abolish the LAW but to fulfil it.
They need the mind flipped or the tablet of their mind flipped as they believe that HE came to abolish the law.
WHAT A ROYAL MESS.
I have been following you Skip; but I am no where near where you and your colleagues are but I am following on TO KNOW HIM and HIS ways.
I may not be explaining my self as rightly but I have had my voice given to me FROM ABOVE and my notes ♫ are limited.. hahaha. Smiles to you all who encourage Skip and may we all meet at HIS FEET now and then WHEN HE COMES. UNTIL HE COME is what I have on my gravestone.
Blessings !

Tanya Predoehl

“As Gaston observes, if the New Testament is Jewish through and through, there is no biblical justification for the Christian religion.’

Who is Gaston?

Curtis H

Hi Tanya. I’m sure Skip is referring to Lloyd Gaston who has a book called “Paul and the Torah”. Amazon has it here.

Tanya Predoehl

Thank you,
Curtis.

Kees Brakshoofden

Sounds a lot like my ekklesia. All good a man can do is Gods doing; all bad things are your own doing. So why do anything at all? We just wait for the rapture and than and only than starts our celestial life, a life of glory.

In my own sermons I always tried to be practical: what to do with this text of Paul today? But I could not figure out how to get this in line with the ‘grace’ that was Gods doing alone.

All this being actively preached made me ever more uneasy with the ‘gospel’. What did my church mean for the neighborhood? Nothing more than taking away parkingspace at sundaymorning? For that is all we are doing! This made me increasingly unhappy with such an ‘evangel’. It was the start of my quest for real truth, that brought me to the Hebrew roots of the faith!

This morning I shared with a brother in the congregation that my faith changed dramatically since we returned to Torah. He also knows the Hebrew roots of the faith and he agreed. It’s far more down to earth now, and at the same time pervades your life completely: from getting up in the morning till laying myself to sleep: all day I am voluntary trying to do Gods will by following Torah in every large and small matter. And I love it! It’s no ‘law’! It’s a delight!!!!

It keeps me on His path, His way. And when I fail, there is always the possibility of teshuva. That’s not a onetime event, but a reality everytime I stray.

Baruch ata Yehovah Elohenu!

Gayle Johnson

This is so good. Thank you again, Skip for the past (nine?) years of diligent sharing of His Word. What you have encouraged in the Body will surely bear fruit. I cannot express how grateful I am to be a part of this community. Blessings to all who Shema.

carl roberts

Saved To Serve

In a recent conversation I challenged someone to provide either a theological or historical foundation for the claim that Christians need to be “good” people.

We (Christians) are good because God, (the LORD) is good. Our heart’s desire is to be godly, or “god-like.” Since God is good and kind and caring and compassionate and we are (now) made in His image and in His likeness, then we too will love what He loves and hate what He hates. We (who are His) and we who now belong to Him, and we who are (now) the children of God, want to please our Heavenly Father.
Biblical instruction includes alms for the poor, caring for the sick and ministering unto “the least of these.” Our LORD Jesus (Himself) ~ went about, doing good. ~ Christian, “Do all the good you can. By all the means you can. In all the ways you can. In all the places you can. At all the times you can. To all the people you can. As long as ever you can.” (J. Wesley)
We Christians, (contrary to popular opinion?) are NOT saved to sit, we are saved to serve. To serve one another in love. We have been (again, according to biblical instruction) called to ~ love one another with a pure heart fervently ~ And love is benevolence towards another at cost to myself ~ (remember?)
~ What saith the scripture? ~ (Matthew 25:35)
~ For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in,I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
And again, in the very “practical” book from James, the half-brother of our LORD, we have these instructions of “how to..” ~ If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.…~
This kind of faith is a “show me” kind of faith. Why are Christians, kind, caring and compassionate people? Because, dear friends, God (Himself) is also kind, caring and compassionate! ~ He ever loves and cares for His own!
And again,.. (why do we have to be reminded so often?- what is our malfunction?) ~ even a cup of cold water given ~ and the giver will be rewarded. BTW, both “now” and later!

Friend, how may I serve you?

Teresa

Skip – this was simply fantastic. Thank you for this. I personally find myself too often “defaulting” to those Platonic mindsets. They are hard thought patterns to break after so many years in ‘The Church’. So, I’m grateful for your blog, which constantly challenges me and brings much needed clarity. We so appreciate you.

Michael

Christianity taught that Paul overturned the need for Torah observance by introducing the radical concept of grace (as interpreted by Luther).

Hmmm

Speaking of Luther, there is a lovely Luthern Church at the base of some mountains near my house

It’s called Mt Olive and I attend some AA meetings there, one of which is called “I am what I am”

What I find amusing is that the basic ideological program of AA is in 12 steps and 12 traditions

Bill, the founder of this “faith,” is all about “works;” performing steps and adhering to traditions

And it all takes place at Martin Luther’s church, the man most famous for faith over works

The funny thing is that I find it difficult to find flaws in Bill’s “theology”

Gayle Johnson

How perfectly ironic! I never thought of the 12 step program in this way. Made me laugh. Thanks, Michael. 🙂

Ester

This article is precisely what I am going through with a friend who ‘warned’ me of going back ‘under the law’ and being under the curses! I was told too to forget the ‘OT’ for the moment, and to read the ‘simple gospel’!!
Shocking, really, that one could be that blinded without coming to terms with truth, that the Scriptures comprise of both ‘OT’ and ‘NT’, and Torah is not ‘law’, and we are not free from ‘curses’ (which simply mean being enslaved, or bound through our transgressions) if we continue to rebel against YHWH’s Word/Torah or ways.

Skip’s comment above is from experience most of us go through in these situations, that except folks seek and hunger for truth, there is nothing we can say to convict them of their lack of understanding, in what loving others and doing good meant. It means doing what is required of us first to YHWH, doing that which is pleasing to ABBA by keeping all His commands, rather then simply doing good to man, neglecting our first priority.

We are obligated to living up to His standard. HalleluYAH for this TW.

Jonathan Emmert

This reminds me of Yeshua’s parable about the wedding feast. The invitations went out and no one responded and so the Father asked that the crowds on the street be invited. The invitation was open to everyone. But there was still a requirement – you had to have the right clothing. When a man was found without wedding clothes he was cast out.

It is the same with us…The invitation to join the Kingdom is open to all, but we have to be clothed with righteous works in order to stay.

Daniel

The part of this I can’t understand is that if gentile’s are obligated to Torah why is circumcision excepted?

Daniel

Are you arguing that a gentile male who has entered into fellowship is to, at some time, undergo circumcision as a sign of the mark of the covenant?

I was just reading David Stern’s translation of Galatians 5:2-3: 2:”Mark my words – I, Sha’ul, tell you that if you undergo b’rit-milah the Messiah will be of no advantage to you at all! 3: Again, I warn you: any man who undergoes b’rit-milah is obligated to observe the entire Torah!”

Even in Stern’s translation, to my ears, he is conveying Paul’s stance as being against circumcision for gentile males which would be in unison with Acts 15 which omits circumsion.

If I understand your POV correctly you would say that Acts 15 is about entry into fellowship, not moving forward in obedience. I can’t see that POV when Paul in Galatians is not telling the gentiles males that they need, at some point, to be circumcised. He in fact is warning against that according to Stern.

Suzanne

So I am wondering: does circumcision done in the hospital for gentile babies in the first 48 hours of life, with no intent for the act to be associated with “b’rit”, count as b’rit milah in Torah? Circumcision in western civilization has been practiced as a cosmetic procedure for at least a few generations. Isn’t that form without substance? Does it change when the heart changes? And if that is so, aren’t we back to the issue of heart b’rit vs. skin?

Daniel

Will do. Thanks Skip.

Suzanne

Agreed – so the heart of the one BEING circumcised was not necessarily at issue, but the heart of the one DOING the B’rit. Is that right? (sorry for the upper case, I can’t figure out how to turn off the italics once I get it started.)

So if the uncircumcised follower of Yeshua who wants to be fully Torah observant needs to be circumcised, wouldn’t the one who was circumcised in a purely social sense (such as the Protestant Gentile at birth in the 1950’s, who has since become a Torah-observant follower of Yeshua), also need a B’rit Milah in the sense of another cut? Otherwise it seems we are placing value on the mark alone – even when done in another culture and potentially to another god.

Not trying to challenge you here — I’m just trying to make sense of this. 🙂

Michael and Arnella Stanley

I admit I was nonplussed when I read the question, but I agree with you Skip. In honor of all the former Calvinists here let’s call this new theology “Once circumcised, always circumcised” . Circumspectly yours, Michael

Ron Fink

I have had this argument with many, many pastors and church leaders.
I always liken true salvation to an auto accident. Even after the cars are towed away, one can still see where the point of impact was by the skid marks.
They take a sudden turn in another direction.

This is also true of one’s salvation experience. looking back on one’s life, the impact of a life changing experience with the creator of the universe leaves one with a ……changed life. Or it should.
If the “new” person still lives like the “old” person, then I would doubt that salvation had occurred.

true salvation changes a person, and the Holy Spirit leads one in the path of righteousness, as illustrated in the scriptures.

Just a we, as citizens of the United States have civic responsibilities, voting, paying taxes, obeying the law, etc. We as citizens of the Kingdom of God also have responsibilities to God and the other citizens and even to those outside the Kingdom of god.

This is illustrated in the Hebrew concept of “destroying the old house”.
There is nothing of the old life left to go back to.
Skip can expand and illustrate this concept.

The Hebrew scriptures begin with an oversized letter B. In Hebrew, the letter B “spelled out in full” is the Hebrew word for “House”. It is said that God is building His “House”. On the 2nd day, God “separated” things in creation. B is the 2nd letter of the Hebrew alphabet.
A house separates. Those who are family from those without, who are NOT family.
Family members obey the instructions (Torah) of the head of the house (Father).

Taken along with the Jewish concept of community, a true believer has a responsibility to the family, and to the community at large. The church has failed at both. No Father can bless disobedient children, does anyone believe God will bless His own disobedient children who refuse to follow His instructions?

Ron Fink

In reading all the fine comments here, I see how many here truly desire to follow Torah (God’s instructions) and are concerned over certain issues/questions (circumcision).

At Shavout (Pentecost), Torah was given through Moses, at Shavout in Acts, the Holy Spirit was given through Jesus. It the Holy Spirit’s indwelling that brings obedience by His prompts and His instruction as we read and absorb the Word of God. In the spiritual realm, this is “eating my flesh and drinking my blood” as stated by Jesus in John 6:51-53

The main issue, I believe, is an issue of the HEART and the SPIRIT. God wants us to LOVE. Him and each other.
If we truly love each other, we won’t be lying, cheating, plotting against or murdering our fellow man, who is created in the image of God. In obeying the instructions, we follow Torah.

When asked by a Pharisee which was the greatest commandment in the Torah, Jesus responded by quoting Deut 6:4,5

He then proceeded to say that the second greatest commandment was to love your neighbor as you love your own flesh. Jesus added that “on these two commandments hand all the law and the prophets.” Matt 22:35-40

A true believer will love God and seek with his HEART, to follow God’s instructions and the promptings of the Holy Spirit, and will love others with the same love that he is loved with by the Lord.

Remember, the LETTER of the law kills, but the Spirit gives life 2co 3:6
Love justice and mercy.

Keep seeking and keep loving friends for the Kingdom is near.

Wayne Berry

Thank you Skip! This is awesome..