The Game Plan
And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” Matthew 19:17 NASB
To enter into life – So what do you want out of life? What are the things that really, really matter? If The Man came to you to grant one wish, and only one, what would it be? Such a man came to Yeshua. This man appeared to have it all. He was young. He was righteous. He was wealthy. But he asked for one more thing. “What one thing should I do to guarantee my eternal well-being?” He had it all here. What he wanted to know was how to have it all there too.
In our Christian world, we think that this young man’s request must be answered by a statement of the gospel. We think that what he really, really needs is forgiveness and a personal relationship with Jesus. Then he will have the guarantee he seeks. But a deeper look at Yeshua’s answer suggests that this is not the needed response. Yeshua does tell him how to have “eternal” life. He tells him what he needs to do to enter into life itself. The Greek phrase is eiselthein eis ten zoen. The verb is eiserchomai (to go or come into, to enter). In Yeshua’s statement, it is preceded by the Greek word thelo (to wish, desire). Some grammar is needed before we examine the actual meaning.
First, let’s look at thelo. It’s a present tense, active verb. That means Yeshua recognizes the immediate expression of desire. But we know that both boule and thelo mean “to wish or desire.” The difference is that boule means to desire and plan something but not necessarily to carry it out while thelo means not only to desire but to accomplish, to make it happen. Yeshua indicates in His answer to the young man what it will take to make it happen, not just to wish that it would happen. “Here’s what you need to do right now,” is the sense of it.
Now we encounter something odd about the next verb, “to enter into,” is not in the present tense. It is an aorist verb, a tense form that has no real English equivalent. It means something that has been completed in the past but without specifying whether the action was completed in a moment or over a long period. This verb is also an infinitive. That means it doesn’t tell us if it applies to one person or many. In other words, the Greek text indicates that Yeshua’s answer was something finished in the past but we don’t know how long or who or how many were involved. But this just doesn’t make sense. Here is the young man waiting for an assignment that he is ready to accomplish; an assignment that will insure eternal life. There is no question that this man used the Hebrew expression olam ha-ba, life in the world to come. Yeshua doesn’t seem to answer this question at all. Instead, He directs the man toward life that has already come. The young man is looking toward the future. Yeshua points him toward the past.
What? You mean this isn’t about entering into a life in heaven? Look what Yeshua actually says. He says, “If you desire and are ready to bring about life.” Notice that He does not qualify the word zoe (life) with the adjective aionios (eternal, everlasting). Yeshua talks about life itself, not about life in the olam ha-ba. Yeshua’s answer implies that whatever zoe aionion is, it is found in the past, already finished. Life has already arrived. If you want to enter into it, then there is something you can do. What is that?
Keep the commandments.
That’s right. The young man asks about his future well-being. He is told to look at what God has already done. If he wants to enter into the life God has already provided, a life that implies continuance in the olam ha-ba, then all he has to do is keep the instructions God has already given. The manifestation of “eternal” life is to be found in the Torah life.
Topical Index: life, eternal, enter in, eiserchomai, desire, thelo, olam ha-ba, Matthew 19:17
“The thief’s purpose is to steal and kill and destroy. My purpose is to give them a rich and satisfying life.” (John 10.10)
Who is the thief spoken of here? (who steals our joy, our strength, our time, our attention?) And Who is speaking these words? “My purpose/my will/my desire”- these were (and are!) the eternal words of Yeshua the G-d/man. -Are we listening?
If (since) it was His purpose to give ‘them’ a rich and satisfying life- what about us who are alive and living today? Were these (His) words, only for the original twelve or do they apply to the disciples/learners/talmudim of today? And do we (who belong to Him) have this “rich and satisfying life” right here, right now- in this present moment? Is this “pie-in-the-sky-bye and bye-when I die?” or is this “life”- in the nasty (or nice) “now-and-now?” “Is the LORD our G-d in the midst of us-mighty to save?” Has He/Does He/Will He -still “deliver us daily?” Is the heavenly manna, provided for sustenance in the wilderness still available today (in this wilderness) as it was ‘back in the day?’ Is “eternal life” a quantity or a quality?
“If you love Me- keep my commandments..” Who said this? -and are we listening? “Keep my commandments, and live; and my law as the apple of your eye.” (Proverbs 7.2) “For the commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life,” (Proverbs 6.23)
“It is written..” (Remember these words?) – “whatever He says unto you…-do it” (John 2.5) What was the command of Christ? – “love one another with a pure heart fervently..” -The goal of this instruction is love that flows from a pure heart, from a clear conscience, and from a sincere faith. (1 Timothy 1.5)
“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.” (Galatians 5.22,23)
Matt 20:28 just as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.
Last night my son wanted a book of fiction to read but most of mine are in boxes
So I gave him Skip’s Words to Lead By
This morning I looked up Matthew 19:17 in The Jerusalem Bible and 20:24 caught my eye
The heading above section 20:24 is “Leadership with Service”
Made me think about something my old teacher in college Fred Jameson used to say
And I never knew what he was referring to, or meant for that matter, regarding some work of fiction
After some very long and complicated theoretical point he would often turn to look at me and say:
“of course, know we are back again at the old “master/slave dialectic”
oops, he would say “now” we are …
Skip… you leave out the rest of the story….
verse 20: The young man said to Him, “All these things (commandments) I have kept; what am I still lacking?”
He had kept them, but still did not have life. I don’t think your conclusion is proper in light of his reply to Jesus.
So, Jesus, in step with the Spirit cuts through to the real issue:
Verse 21: Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”
One might say that his problem was idolatry, a breaking of a command, but Jesus doesn’t emphasis that here, “If you wish to be complete” … He in short says, “if you want to find your life, you must lose it”. Not exactly a Torah command.
And I forgot to mention the essence of the call to him…. “Follow Me.” Not Moses, not Torah, not commandments, not observances, not ritual, not the rabbis…. but “Me”. That is my humble interpretation anyways… we follow a living person from now on to have life.
John 5:39-40 You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;
40 and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.
I saw the same thing, Bruce. I don’t see how SkiP came to this conclusion from this Scripture.
In order for Yeshua to be the Messiah, He should be sinless(Prophecy:Isaiah 53:9), which He was – 1Peter2:22. This meant He had to keep the 2 commandments,that summed up the 10, that summed up the Torah.
I think “Follow Me” means follow the Living Torah for Yeshua is the Word – John1:1 and the Word is living Torah = John 1:4(that was nailed to the cross, died and was resurrected – Torah alive!).
Q? What Bible did the disciples and Jesus used? They only had the Torah, prophets and Writings. So the definitions of the words would come from those. Please read the definition of ” life” – chay :Gen2;7
Deut 32:46 – 47
Ps 119:50: This is my comfort in my affliction; for thy word(Torah) hath given me life
Ps 119:93 I will never forget thy precepts;for with them thy hast given me life
Proverbs 13;14 The law(Torah) of the wise is a fountain of life
Proverb 3;1-2, Ps 119:17< Ps119:144 –
By the definition of YHWH, Life is in the laws,precepts, ordinances, statues, words of YHWH. When Yeshua uses these words, He uses them in the same way He has already used them. Now read again: John6:63,1:4,14:6, 5:24 1john1:1 , Acts 2:28. Life is not a concept of Utopia. When Yeshua said that He came to give us life, He was referring to the power of His words when put into action. If we really believe that Yeshua is YHWH, then we have to come to terms with the fact that Yeshua's words are YHWH words and He spoke according to the law.
“Not exactly a Torah command.”
“if you want to find your life, you must lose it”.
Hi Bruce,
Two things seem to be at play here:
1. “there is one alone who is good”
2. “to enter into life, keep the commandments”
You are correct in my view that to lose your life is not exactly a Torah command
But if God is no thing, then to focus on things is to not focus on God (logically speaking)
So to focus on the one alone who is good is to not focus on things
King Lear’s great mistake is to think that “nothing comes from nothing”
When, according to the Torah, everything important comes from nothing 🙂
Hi Bruce,
Can I suggest that you search the web site for Torah, obedience and replacement theology? I have written extensively on this and just don’t have the energy to repeat it all over again. Sorry. Very briefly, your point is built on the mistaken assumption that Yeshua did not expect Torah obedience when He himself, all of His disciples including Paul and the historical record of the early believers up to about 200 AD (and much later in some areas) confirms that He did. History shows that the idea that Torah does not apply to believers was introduced by some of the early Church fathers (like Origen, Marcion, Tertullian). I realize that it is now commonly assumed to be true of Yeshua and “Christians” in the first century, but the record speaks otherwise. Sorry to put you off like this. Perhaps others will enter into the discussion.
Bruce,
Yes, I can see why you came to this conclusion.
The issue here is not Torah. Torah is not in oppostion to the fullness of life. The young man’s attachment to his great possessions is the real enemy.
Yeshua entered this dialogue first by saying, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.”
You can keep the commandments and not follow the One who so graciously gave the commandments. This has been true since the beginning and was true to this young man and is true for every generation following.
Moses followed the One who gave the Torah as did Yeshua and He followed His Father’s instructions and teachings with full intention and completion. Looking to Yeshua the author and perfecter of our faith does not mean we can become blind to His Father’s and ours instructions and teachings.
“Follow me.” Is not a following away from the target of God’s Torah. Following Yeshua is a revelation of the full aim of Torah upon our hearts. This has always been the Father’s target and the Holy Spirit delights writing the Torah upon our hearts.
Yes, I agree that following Torah is a given but the specific issue at hand was the young man’s priorities not following Torah. Skip’s teaching is confusing because Yeshua and Skip are focusing on different issues.
I don’t think so. Look at the commandments that are mentioned in this discussion. Which ones are missing? All of the ones that have to do with the priority of God. The young man affirms that he has keep those commandments that relate to interactions with other people, but conspicuous by absence are the first commandments that deal with relationship and priority of God.
In addition, I see no textual evidence that convinces me that this young man wasn’t attempting to insure the kind of life he had would continue in the olam ha’ba. Yes, his priorities are not correct but the answer is not “follow Jesus” as if that meant setting aside Torah. The answer is understand the priorities of Torah which begin with God and then recognize that living with those priorities NOW is life. The reason the man is unhappy is simply because if he has to change his priorities to actually met the requirements of Torah, he will have to change everything about how he lives.
in response Bruce to “if you want to find your life, you must lose it”. Not exactly a Torah command.”
Would anything that proceeds out of the mouth of the Author of the Torah -our LORD Jesus (who is the) Christ, (G-d Incarnate) be considered also included in His ‘commands’ to us? Is “love one another” a command of Christ? The law of the LORD? (He is LORD, right?) Is this included in the instructions of our Master/Teacher?
He did not come to destroy the law but to fulfill it. He “fleshed out” for all to see the ‘how-to’ of daily living.
“The young man is looking toward the future. Yeshua points him toward the past.”
This reminds me of one of Skip’s previous posts on 1/8/08. I quote from that article entitled, “Natural Idolatry”:
“Is it any wonder that the Hebrew word for the future is a word that gives us an image of a man in a rowboat, looking back at where he came from while he rows toward a place he cannot see? Once aligned with the markers he can see (where he has already been), his future is secure. He can’t row while straining his neck to look where he is going. So, God leaves markers, lots of them, in order that we can get aligned with where He has been, and be confident that the alignment will take us where He wants us to go. “
That is interesting… in light of putting the hand to the plow and never looking back, remember Lot’s wife, and “I forget what is behind”…. just for ballance…. 🙂
Hi Skip,
“Search the Web”??? I thought we were encouraged to search the scriptures? In my search of them, the argument for Torah obedience for righteousness falls apart quickly.
Just one example: (there are many)
Acts 15:5 But some of the sect (that word means “heresy”) of the Pharisees who had believed stood up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to observe the Law of Moses.”
Peter answers them:
Acts 15:10 “Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?
That yoke is the Law of Moses, and nobody can bear it. You can’t even keep it… it is impossible. And if you want to be under it, you are responsible to keep the whole thing, or you are under a curse, as it is written:
Gal 3:10
CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT ABIDE BY ALL THINGS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, TO PERFORM THEM.” (Caps for OT quotation)
And:
James 2:10
For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.
It is just not tenable, in my humble opinion…
I am sure that I said, Search the web SITE, not search the web. If you do you will find plenty of material about the misunderstanding of the passages you cite (Acts 15) and a lot of other discussion of the proposal of replacement theology. I wouldn’t send you to the WEB. But I will encourage you to ask, “What would these verse have meant to the audience that first heard them” and to ask why Paul defends his Torah obedience years after his Damascus road encounter.
Yes… you did say website… my bad.
Well, I had just written a whole note concerning your last clarification, which I won’t bother sending…
Then, Torah is really for guidelines, and not for righteousness. Rom 14 is clear, if I want to have a bacon wrapped scallop at a dinner, and it offends no brother, I am free to do so…. for I eat and give thanks unto the Lord, and he who does not eat and gives thanks unto the Lord is equally accepted. This pre-empts complete Torah obedience, (the same as circumcision). There are some who regard one day above another, and some who regard every day alike…. let each one be fully convinced in his own mind.
So it is not binding… right?
Realizing that I am tipping my hand on future Today’s Word editions, I thought I would add this:
Therefore, the only real way to conquer the limitations of the human frame is to rely on God’s discernment of moral values. Life offers no guarantees that what we do today may not turn out to be destructive or pointless tomorrow. Only God can know which actions contribute to the Good and which do not. Since the final arbiter of moral distinction must be God alone, “the supreme response” of man must be obedience.
It’s really straightforward. We can act according to our own best estimates of moral behavior, fighting the constant appeal of selfish motives even within noble acts, hoping that our decisions ultimately contribute to our well-being and the well-being of the world, without certainty that they actually will – or – we can obey God. We can simply do what He says to do and put aside the incessant quest to understanding how it all “fits.” But we can’t do both. We can’t pretend that we will serve Him and walk according to His instructions and at the same time reserve our right to question His commands because we don’t approve or understand them.
The man who truly recognizes that he is not God will seek to obey God. The man who thinks his own reason is still the arbiter of truth will obey when it seems reasonable.
Wrong. You are reading Romans backwards, interpreting it from the point of view that it is about the FREEDOM of not following Torah, when it is really about the NECESSITY of following Torah so as not to give offense to those Jews who still withhold belief in Yeshua as the Messiah. Please see Mark Nanos on Romans for clarification.
Oh, I see another point here that needs to be clarified. I do not believe that we keep the commandments in order to “earn” righteousness, nor do we keep them in order to b e “saved.” We keep the commandments because God tells us to, for His purposes, and out of gratitude for what He has already done on our behalf. We keep them to please Him and to act in ways that distinguish us from the world so that we are useful to Him as He directs. To suggest that God no longer wants His children to follow His instructions is untenable. And to suggest that Yeshua would replace the Father’s instructions is to deny that Yeshua and the Father on one.
Then you must compel all believers to become circumcised and keep all of the Laws of Moses. There can be no middle ground. If Torah obedience is mandatory, then you do believe that it is a matter of salvation.
Rom 14 may have as one of it’s points the “becoming as the Jew so as to win the Jews”, but it also clearly says that when it comes to food, drink and days… it is a matter of conscience, not law. Don’t judge him who eats, or him who doesn’t eat… God has accepted him.
We probably have to agree to disagree… I have no problem with anyone practicing the Torah and all of it’s regulations, feasts and dietary rules as an expression of their love to God… I accept that as their right before Him, but if you start to demand that everyone is bound to keep it, I believe you enter into a heretical realm. That is my point of dissention here.
Thanks for taking the time to reply to all of this. I know it can be belaboring for you.
Bruce,
You would do well to read the so-called “proof texts” in the context in which they were originally written (cultural, historical, socio-political, geographic, linguistic and religous contexts are all vital to consider) rather than imposing a 21st century Greco-Roman/Western Christian paradigm onto what are translations of 1st century middle-eastern letters.
Because you believe that the Torah is made up of “regulations, feasts and dietary rules” you really have no idea of its true purpose, nor do you recognise how much of the “New Testament” teaching is wholly and completely based in Torah.
The Torah is completely and fully about God’s mercy and grace. It is the story of one man’s family and one generation who were redeemed out of slavery and brought into covenant with the Creator of the universe, by His gracious choice and mercy. Exodus through Deuteronomy tell of their journey from slavery to freedom; Genesis tells how they got to be in slavery in the first place. The instructions contained in Torah are not merely “regulations, feasts and dietary rules” but rather God’s teaching on how to live in harmony in the community of faith, being separate and distinctive from the “world” and being the “light of the world” and a “kingdom of priests”, all with the purpose of redeeming His creation and restoring the rest of the world back to fellowship with our creator (which every subsequent generation has failed to do).
Here’s the thing – God brought us out of bondage and slavery (that’s redemption – the Feast of Passover), rescued us from the pursuing Egyptian army (that’s Salvation, which is not a one-time event but an ongoing process of life – how many times has God rescued/saved you today?), took us through the Red Sea (baptism), then brought us to the mountain where He confirmed the covenant (which was made at Passover, the feast of redemption) and gave us His instructions for living (written on our hearts by the Holy Spirit, as Jeremiah 31:31-33 says). This happened 50 days after we came out of Egypt, at the Feast of Pentecost. He promised that if we obey His instructions, He would bless us. On the other hand, if we chose not to obey, there would be consequences that are a direct result of our choice not to follow His instructions. Failure to obey has no effect on our redemption, which happened at Passover (out of Egypt) and at the Cross (which was the fulfillment of Passover, to the exact day, hour and moment), but it does affect our usefulness in the Kingdom and the blessings that we receive (or not).
One might ask what we are really rebelling against, if we do not desire to keep the instructions God gave for life (bearing in mind that not all of them are applicable to me, after all, I’m not a woman, nor a levitical priest, nor the high priest, so I don’t have to worry about those for a start, and there is no operating temple or altar so that takes care of a good few more that we can’t currently do either)? Before answering that, it might be instructive to see how many references to keeping the commandments there are in the gospels and the apostolic writings.
Mat 19:17 ESV – [17] And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you would enter life, keep the commandments.”
Mat 22:36-40 ESV – [36] “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” [37] And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind (Deut 6:3). [38] This is the great and first commandment. [39] And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself (Lev 19:18). [40] On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”
Luk 1:5-6 ESV – [5] In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, of the division of Abijah. And he had a wife from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. [6] And they were both righteous before God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and statutes of the Lord. [This verse disproves the lie that “no-one can possibly keep “the Law”…”]
Jhn 14:15, 21, 23-24 ESV – [15] “If you love me, you will keep my commandments. … [21] Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.” … [23] Jesus answered him, “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. [24] Whoever does not love me does not keep my words. And the word that you hear is not mine but the Father’s who sent me.
Jhn 15:10 ESV – [10] If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love.
1Jo 2:3-4 ESV – [3] And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments [4] Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,
1Jo 3:22, 24 ESV – [22] and whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do what pleases him. … [24] Whoever keeps his commandments abides in God, and God in him. And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he has given us.
1Jo 5:2-3 ESV – [2] By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and obey his commandments [3] For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome.
2Jo 1:6 ESV – [6] And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, so that you should walk in it.
Rev 12:17 ESV – [17] Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus. And he stood on the sand of the sea.
Rev 14:12 ESV – [12] Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus.
Rev 22:14 KJV – [14] Blessed [are] they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
One might therefore ask the question, “How much do we really love Him?”
Bruce, you wrote, “Then you must compel all believers to become circumcised and keep all of the Laws of Moses.”
Perhaps you might explain just what you understand by “all of the Laws of Moses.” I’d be interested to hear your take on that.
Regarding circumcision, that has nothing to do with the “Law of Moses” but rather the covenant with Abraham regarding the inheritance of the land. We do not live in the land of Israel (as promised to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and their descendants, which is much larger than that which is called Israel today) and we do not have a temple or an altar. You might recall that Paul (Rabbi Sha’ul of Tarsus) did circumcise Timothy because Timothy accompanied Sha’ul to the temple in Jerusalem and he could not take part in the temple service without circumcision. Paul did not require anyone else living outside Israel to be circumcised who was not going up to the temple in Jerusalem. The scriptures are clear, though, that physical circumcision is a picture of the true circumcision which is of the heart. Lest you be confused and think that this is a “New Testament” concept…
Deu 10:16 ESV – [16] Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no longer stubborn.
Deu 30:6 ESV – [6] And the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live.
God promised that He would circumcise our hearts, so that we would love him. This is the ministry of the Holy Spirit, who God promised would “write my Torah on their hearts” and would “take away your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.” If, however, the “Law of Moses” was temporary and no longer applies post-Calvary, then is God no longer in the business of circumcising hearts and causing us to love Him?
Wrong. I believe Torah obedience is mandatory if I want to be fully useful to God. Salvation is a matter of God’s grace. Usefulness is a matter of my choice.
Dear Skip,
Thank you for writing at length concerning obedience to God’s commands and His heart in giving them. I think there are even many more NT references than you mentioned… but suffice to say, I completely agree with you, God wants us to keep His commandments. I know that Torah is not just a litany of dietary and calendar restrictions, but it is those things that are so clearly refuted (in my estimation) in the NT. I don’t know how you can in any way read :
Rom 14:14 I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.
Or,
Rom 14:5-6
5 One person regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind.
6 He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God.
Or
1 Cor 8:8 But food will not commend us to God; we are neither the worse if we do not eat, nor the better if we do eat.
for the body imposed until a time of reformation.
…and come away believing that it is mandatory that we keep certain dietary restrictions and calender events. We are free to, and also free not to… just be fully convinced in your own mind before the Lord.
And circumcision is a part of the law… Lev 12:3
I know Paul had Timothy circumcised, but not Titus. no requirement, except to not offend the Jews, that he might win them…
Bruce, you wrote, “I don’t know how you can in any way read :…”
Simple – in context. You are reading those verses from a 21st century western Christian paradigm as if they were written to you, about things pertinent to you today, as instructions on how to live. They weren’t. They were written to a mixed congregation of new gentile believers, Jews who accepted Yeshua as Messiah and Jews who didn’t, but aimed mainly at the gentile believers living in that community (in 1st century Rome) and worshipping with their Jewish brethren in the synagogue. You’re reading someone else’s mail and you only have half the conversation.
It would take way too long to go right back to the beginning of the letter to give you the full context. Skip has already referred you to the excellent book, “The Mystery of Romans” by Mark D. Nanos. I agree with his recommendation – you should read it. Follow up with 3 books by Prof. Brad H Young (Professor of Biblical Studies at Oral Roberts University) – “Jesus, The Jewish Theologian”, “Paul, The Jewish Theologian”, and “Meet the Rabbis”.
Beginning in Romans 13:1, Paul is exhorting the gentile believers to “be subject to the governing authorities” (in the context of the letter, as Nanos points out, this refers to the leaders of the synagogue, not the pagan, Roman government). He goes on to talking about the “temple taxes” – the contributions that all Jews living in the diaspora made through the synagogue towards the upkeep and operations of the temple in Jerusalem (these are also mentioned in Acts).
When we get to Romans 14, bearing in mind the audience, Paul gives instructions about how to deal with those who are “weak in faith”. Who are these “weak in faith”? It is not completely clear; Nanos suggests that Paul may be referring to Jews who have not yet accepted Yeshua as Messiah (perhaps implied by the condition, “…not to quarrel over opinions”, which is a very “Jewish” thing to do), but it may also be referring to new believers coming into the community.
The understanding of verse 2 – One person believes he may eat anything, while the “weak person” eats only vegetables – is perhaps helped by Acts 15, the letter to the gentiles, in which James dictates the four minimum requirements for gentiles coming to faith in Yeshua to come into fellowship; “abstinence from sexual immorality, meat sacrificed to idols, things strangled and from blood.” This may very well pertain to one who has the confidence to “eat whatever is sold in the marketplace” vs. “I don’t know if it has been sacrificed to idols or not, therefore I won’t eat any meat at all” (c.f. 1 Cor 10). We also tend to have a very limited view of the phrase “weak person”. The Greek ἀσθενέω – astheneō – has a much wider range of meanings than just “weak in faith” – it can also mean sick or poor. It is used in the LXX to translate the Hebrew root kaf-shin-lamed which in its various verb forms can mean fall, stumble, fail, cast down, ruin, overthrow(n), offense and offend. Paul almost certainly had this word in mind when he wrote the letter. Exactly what he meant must be determined from the context.
Verse 3 – “Let not the one who eats despise the one who doesn’t, and let not the one who doesn’t pass judgement on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him.” Again, the context is whether or not one believes it is OK to eat meat sold in the marketplace. Paul says, “you’re not qualified to judge your brother in this matter”. (verse 4).
Rom 14:5 ESV – [5] One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.
One must be aware of the debates that took place between the two major rabbinic schools of thought in the 1st century Jewish world – Beyt Hillel and Beyt Shammai. It was a rabbinic custom that everyone should fast at least 2 days every week. (Note – this is not commanded in Torah but it was a custom of the rabbis, of whom Paul was one, of the house of Hillel). One group taught that it had to be two specific days, the other that it could be any two days (other than Shabbat as I understand it, but I could be wrong on that point) and that each individual was free to choose which two days on which they’d fast. Literally, one esteemed one day as better than another (for fasting), while another esteems all days alike. How do I know that this is about fasting?
Rom 14:6 ESV – [6] The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.
Eating or not eating and observance of specific days is clearly linked – Paul is talking here about the rabbinic custom of fasting and the dispute as to whether or not it had to be on any specific days or could be any day of the week.
Paul goes on to deal with the divisions that this was causing in the community:
Rom 14:10-13 ESV – [10] Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; [11] for it is written, “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.” [12] So then each of us will give an account of himself to God. [13] Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother.
Rom 14:17-19 ESV – [17] For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. [18] Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. [19] So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.
In other words, lets concentrate on the things that unite rather than the things that divide.
Now, verse 20:
Rom 14:20 ESV – [20] Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats.
“Everything is indeed clean…” – Paul is clearly talking about food as understood by the Jews of the 1st century. Unclean meats (that which God defined as unclean in Leviticus) were not considered to be food, therefore they cannot be included in “everything” in the context of this letter. Paul is referring again to food that may or may not have been sacrificed to idols. The same issue is addressed in 1 Cor 10 (almost exactly).
Just in case you doubt that this is in fact the context, the next verse removes all doubt:
Rom 14:21 ESV – [21] It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble.
The word “meat” is the Greek word κρέα – krea, a form of κρέας – kreas – which has a very specific meaning: the flesh of an animal that has been sacrificed! I can assure you that it was the flesh of an animal that had been sacrificed in Rome it would not have been sacrificed to YHVH – it would only have been to an idol.
In summary, Romans 14 has absolutely nothing to do with the definition of what animals are considered food and what are not (the definitions given in Leviticus), nor does it have anything to do with the Feasts of YHVH or Sabbath (again, Leviticus 23). It is solely concerned with issues that confronted the community of faith living in a pagan city (in this case, Rome).
Regarding 1 Cor 8, I’ll leave that as an “excercise for the reader” to research the historic, socio-political, temporal and religious contexts for that letter.
Shalom.
Rodney,
A more excellent summary could not be found. Thanks.
Thanks for the kind words, Skip. Just found a typo (if you could correct it, please) – “Literally, one esteemed one day as better than another (for tasting)” – should read “for fasting”, not “tasting”. 🙂
Hi Rodney,
Thank you for your reply and all of it’s detail. I appreciate the time it took to write all of that. I do endeavor to not have a biased, or myopic view, but look at all things in context, even as limited as I am.
Unfortunately, I stumbled over your first statement
You said,
“Beginning in Romans 13:1, Paul is exhorting the gentile believers to “be subject to the governing authorities” (in the context of the letter, as Nanos points out, this refers to the leaders of the synagogue, not the pagan, Roman government).”
Do they bear the sword to punish? You think that all of the new believers in Rome were going to synagogues and submitting to priests under the Torah? Do you believe that we should be doing the same today?
Peter echoes the exact same thing, and you cannot in any way interpret it as those in the synagogue:
1 Peter 2:13-14
13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority,
14 or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.
Paul almost mimics Peter’s statement, including the punishment, and re-states a similar in Titus 3:1-2
1 Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good deed,
2 to malign no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing every consideration for all men.
I am concerned that if you interpret Paul’s statement in Rom 13:1 incorrectly, what should I believe that you are doing with Chapter 14? I’m sure Nanos has much good to say, but I have never in any commentary or book, ever heard that one…
Once again, I am sure Rodney would echo my following remarks. No one can simply read the passages written in first century idioms and cultural assumptions by pretending that the words mean exactly what we understand them to mean today. So, with that in mind, YES the governing authorities of the synagogues did in fact wield a sword of punishment (a Jewish idiom) and YES believers in the synagogues were expected to submit themselves to the authority of the synagogue because that person determined halakah for the community. Once again, please refer to Mark Nanos’ fine commentary which takes great pains to elaborate the first century culture and Jewish idioms used in Rome.
Your suggestion that Peter’s passage and the further passage in Titus supports your claim depends on ignoring the idioms in use at that time. You continue to interpret the passages as Luther did, as if they were written yesterday with our culture and our politics in mind.
The reason you haven’t heard this in any of the standard commentaries (which doesn’t mean it is incorrect, by the way) is that nearly all commentaries since Augustine have incorporated a replacement theology which requires that Paul NOT be writing to Gentile believers WITHIN a Jewish synagogue. Replacement theology absolutely depends on the validity of the assumption that Jews and Christians established separate religions very early on, in fact, so early that Paul is seen as a “convert” to Christianity, something he actually specifically denies!
HOWEVER, many significant contemporary scholars are seriously questioning this traditional view. See J. Gager, B. Young, P. Eisenbaum, K. Soulen, A. Becker, A. Reed, D. Boyarin, P. Fredriksen and many others. Replacement theology is taught by every major denomination so most of the works you find endorsed by those seminaries incorporate this idea, but THERE IS NO BIBLICAL SUPPORT for it. It is based on an assumption about what happened in history, not on the text itself or on the actual historical record, as it turns out (see M. Dacy). As a result of this paradigm, biblical material is wrenched from it historical context and read AS IF it were written to Christian communities like those found after 400AD.
I highly recommend that if you really want to know the truth about the place of Torah and the lives of believers after the resurrection, you avail yourself of the considerable scholarship on this subject. You might discover that the Church today is just as off-base on this issue as it was in the antebellum period when it argued that slavery for Africans was proper because it was the curse on Ham.
At least this much is clear. We have had a lively debate and we have all learned a lot. Thanks.
Rodney,
I decided to check out Nanos, and found one statement that surprised me. It basically says that we gentiles who have come to Christ do not have to observe the Torah!!! At least, not like a Jew would.
In this context, I can much more readily accept what you said… it is the requirement of Torah obedience by gentile believers coming to Christ that I am opposed to, by the conviction of the scriptures.
Here is his quote: for what I can see, I agree with it.
Jewish believers in Christ (such as is Paul!) remain faithful to Torah-observance, while non-Jews do not become Jews (i.e., proselytes) or obliged to observe the Torah of Jews (as proselytes are), except to the degree expected of those from the nations who turn from the worship of idols and the kind of behavior inappropriate for those who have turned to the Creator God. They are to live as “righteous Gentiles” or “God-fearers.”
I do want to thank you, Skip, A.W. and others for taking time to share with me. I hope I have not been offensive… my convictions will not die easily, unless I can see something clearly in the scriptures… so I challenge things directly. But I love the Truth, and the Truth shall prevail!
Shalom
I’m sorry to say that you have taken Nanos’ comment out of context. The debate isn’t about whether or not Gentile who come to faith in Yeshua are to keep Torah. The debate that Paul is engaged in is whether or not they must become JEWS! In the first century there was a process for becoming Jewish if you were not born Jewish. In this process, proselytes went through a series of rituals like circumcision and ritual baptism. Paul argues that this is absolutely not necessary because Gentiles have been ushered into the faith through God’s grace. They do not have to become Jewish before they are acceptable to God (this is the whole argument in Galatians). But this has nothing to do with how they are to live AFTER they have come into a right relationship with YHWH. Torah still applies, in whatever ways it would apply to anyone not Jewish. In other words, all the commandments about Levitical practices, for example, do not apply because no Gentile is from the tribe of Levi. Torah requirements for women do not apply to men. Torah restrictions about how to act in the land do not apply to those not in the land. And, of course, some commandment only apply to those BORN Jews. But all that can apply to Gentiles do apply. Paul’s actions toward Timothy and Titus make the point.
CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT. Please look at some of the authors I mentioned in my previous blog. It’s all about context.
Note the following comment from Rabbi Bob Gorelik:
“The Torah and Gentiles”
The Torah was not “invented” at Mt. Sinai. Since it reflects the character of God, it was woven into the fabric of the universe at Creation. And, it is not just for the Jewish people. Not only are there seven prin-ciples, sometimes referred to as the “Noahide Commandments,” that all nations are obligated to ob-serve—throughout Jewish history, there have been Gentiles with a heart for God who have attached themselves to Israel and observed the Commandments given to them as well. This is attested to by the Rabbis in (among other places):
Sifre Deuteronomy, #343; Yalkut Shemoni, Berakhah, #9511
“At His right hand was a fiery law unto them” (Deut. 33:2). The verse asserts that words of Torah are likened to fire. As fire was given from heaven, so were words of Torah given from heaven. (Israel were told, “Ye yourselves have seen that I talked with you from heaven” [Exod. 20:22].) Even as fire is life for the world, so words of Torah are life for the world. Fire: close up to it, one is scorched; away from it, one is chilled; near but not too near, one enjoys it. So are words of Torah: as long as a man labors in them, they are life for him; but when he separates himself from them, they slay him. Even as fire is made use of in this world and in the world-to-come, so words of Torah are made use of in this world and in the world-to-come. Even as fire when used leaves a mark on a man’s body, so words of Torah when used leave a mark on the body. Fire: they who work with it are readily distinguishable from other mortals. So, too—by their walk, by their speech, by their garments in the marketplace—disciples of the wise are just as readily distinguishable.
1 Sifre Deuteronomy and Yalkut Shimoni are Midrashim (sing. Midrash)—from the Hebrew, “investigation, interpretation, or exposition.” Most Midrashim are continuous exegetical commentaries on books of the Hebrew Bible.
Sifre Deuteronomy, #306; Yalkut Shemoni, Haazinu, #942
“My doctrine shall drop as the rain” (Deut. 32:2). Even as rain gives life to the world, so words of To-rah give life to the world. But while some people in the world rejoice in rain, others are grieved by it. Thus he whose pit or vat is full of wine, or his threshing floor full of grain, is distressed by rain. Is the same true of words of Torah? [No indeed], for Scripture goes on to say, “My speech shall distill as the dew” (Deut. 32:2). As all people in the world—all—rejoice in dew, so all people in the world, in all of it, rejoice in words of Torah.
“As showers upon the tender grass” (Deut. 32:2)—as showers coming down upon blades of grass raise them up and make them grow, so words of Torah raise up those who study them and make them grow. “And droplets upon the herb” (ibid.)—as the droplets that come down upon herbs re-fresh them and make them beautiful, so words of Torah refresh those who study them and make them beautiful.
This perspective is obviously based, in part, on the words of the Prophet Isaiah:
2In the last days the mountain of the Lord’s temple will be established as chief among the mountains … and all nations (gôyim [gentiles]) will stream to it. 3Many peoples will come and say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob. He will teach us his ways, so that we may walk in his paths.” The law will go out from Zion … 4He will judge between the nations … They will beat their swords into plowshares … (Isa 2:2-4).
7On this mountain he will destroy the shroud that enfolds all peoples, the sheet that covers all na-tions (gôyim); 8he will swallow up death forever … (he) will wipe away the tears from all faces … 9In that day they will say, “Surely this is our God; we trusted in him, and he saved us” (Isa 25:7-9).
And, on the words of Yeshua too:
18Then Yeshua came to (his disciples) and said, “… 19go and make disciples of all nations … 20and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you (Mat 28:18-19).
Skip, not being there in the first century, I can’t be solidly sure, but it seems crazy to me to believe that believing Gentiles were going to synagogues run by unbelieving Jews and having fellowship. They were the ONLY synagogues available! Jews hadn’t all converted and the synagogues made into Jesus worship centers. The unbelieving Jews were killing (or at least casting out) the ones who converted, hence Saul himself…. Scripture just doesn’t seem to support this paradigm… they went from house to house, and met in the open squares… “and to the church that meets in her house…” Paul said.
Just not believable….
Please, please read the text in its context. Your English translations are hampering your understanding. Your supporting evidence is selective. Review the articles I have written on ekklesia, qehelah, synagoge. Look at the alterations in the translated texts over the use of ekklesia. Examine Paul’s own statements about where he went to preach and teach and for how long. Your paradigm is interfering with your reading of the text. You must examine the bigger picture. I have given you many authors, far better equipped than you, to lead you into the contextual history. You can choose to ignore them but you will do so only by refusing to look at the scholarship. This is no oddity. What is happening across the spectrum of Pauline and rabbinic studies is shaking the foundation of the Church’s long-held view – and for good reason. I beg you not to go down with the ship.
Well, thank you for encouraging me to not go down with the ship… I would encourage you with the same… it was the Judisers (sorry for the spelling) that Paul was rebuking and contesting that they were “adding” to the Gospel….. with a horrific result…. I will consider with the utmost honesty, and I will continue in the pursuit and love of the Truth. The Spirit of Truth”s arm is not too short to save.
Thank you, and a hearty Shalom!
Thanks, the best part about this community is its ability to keep talking even when we disagree.
Bruce, you wrote, “And circumcision is a part of the law… Lev 12:3
I know Paul had Timothy circumcised, but not Titus. no requirement, except to not offend the Jews, that he might win them…”
Quite right, but it was given first to Abraham as a sign of the covenant between YHVH and Abraham (and his descendants):
Gen 17:4-14 ESV – [4] “Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. [5] No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations. [6] I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make you into nations, and kings shall come from you. [7] And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you. [8] And I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession, and I will be their God.” [9] And God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. [10] This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. [11] You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. [12] He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, [13] both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. [14] Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”
This was well before the Torah was given at Mt Sinai. It was given first to Abraham, and reinstated through Moses in Egypt as a requirement for partaking in the Passover meal, because only those with whom YHVH made covanant could eat it. That included both the natural born descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (the 12 tribes, not just the “Jews” – there were no “Jews” then, despite the rabbis’ protestations that Abraham was the first “Jew”; he wasn’t – he was the first Hebrew) and foreigners (those from other nations, including Egypt) who joined themselves (came into covenant with) YHVH.
It was later specified as a requirement for all those entering into the land promised under the covenant with Abraham (as written in Gen 17), since the sign of circumcision is directly tied to the inheritance of the land. Why did all those who were to eat of the Passover in Egypt have to be circumcised? Because God’s intention was that they would “go directly to the promised land – do not pass go, do not collect $200, but collect all the loot from the Egyptians on the way out), not wander in the wilderness for 40 years. That happened because of their unbelief. The next generation had to be circumcised before they entered the land.
What did Paul say about all this?
Gal 3:28-29 ESV – [28] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. [29] And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.
Now, I know that you’re going to quote Galatians 5 and I don’t want to write another even lengthier post about the context of Galatians, the rabbinic requirements regarding circumcision (and re-circumcision) for conversion to Judaism and the assertion by the Rabbi Shammai (of the House of Shammai or Beyt Shammai) that gentiles had to undergo full conversion to Judaism and fulfil his “18 edicts” in order to enter the kingdom of God (in complete contrast to the teachings of Rabbi Hillel, founder of Beyt Hillel, whose grandson Rabbi Gamliel had been Paul’s teacher and who taught that gentiles could be accepted into the kingdom of God if they only kept the “7 Noahide Laws”, which in itself is unscriptural and contrary to Torah) because the letter to the Galatians is a refutation of the teachings of some from the House of Shammai who had come to Galatia pushing their particular theological barrow and caused some considerable angst for the community of faith there.
Rather than go into detail, can I refer you to Skip’s excellent audio series on Galatians. I’m sure that will answer some questions for you (and probably give rise to others).
Shalom Bruce,
The Holy Spirit has written the Father’s commands, instructions, and teachings on our hearts. We are not compelled by man to walk the way of YHWH, but we are compelled by the intimate work of the Holy Spirit.
Since the Torah has been written on our hearts and minds, would it not be double-minded to refuse to walk out what has so vividly been scripted within?
Thanks Brian,
I agree, that the new covenant is to have the laws written on our hearts. But if we walk by the Spirit, we are not under law, because if you walk in the fruit of the Holy Spirit, there is no law against it… it is a fulfillment of the Law to walk in the love of the Holy Spirit… not by an inner “script” per se… but by our new natures in Him.
Stop, please stop. 🙂 Which of the 10 commandments should we stop following if we are no longer under the Law? Hum. I think I’ll get rid of the one about stealing. After all, I am under grace so it doesn’t apply, right? There is no NEW covenant. Please note the several articles I have written on this. Yeshua spoke Hebrew. His reference to the “new” covenant would have used the Hebrew word hadash and the only place in the Tanakh where hadash is used about the covenant is in Jeremiah 31, where God informs His people that He is changing the MEANS of application, not the CONTENT (read it carefully). Then recall that hadash means “renew” not “new.” You can see the implications do not support the idea that the “old” covenant has been set aside.
That is absurd…. I WAS thinking about not doing this one:
Numbers 38“Speak to the sons of Israel, and tell them that they shall make for themselves tassels on the corners of their garments throughout their generations, and that they shall put on the tassel of each corner a cord of blue. 39“It shall be a tassel for you to look at and remember all the commandments of the LORD, so as to do them and not follow after your own heart and your own eyes, after which you played the harlot, 40so that you may remember to do all My commandments and be holy to your God. 41“I am the LORD your God who brought you out from the land of Egypt to be your God; I am the LORD your God.”
I work in a woodshop… tassels could get caught in a machine and be a real problem.
Do you keep this one?
I am considering the stoning of rebellious children though… 🙂
I’ll go and read some of what you have written on the “New” covenant, but it needs to jibe with the gist of the whole NT scriptures if I am to buy in at all…
I asked my rabbi friend Bob Gorelik why he didn’t have tassels on his clothing. He looked straight at me and said, “My shirts don’t have corners.” Duh! Of course they don’t. He understood precisely what the commandment required. I, as I am wont to do as a trained Greek thinker, didn’t pay strict attention to the commandment but ASSUMED that it meant something it did not say.
As usual, another one of Skip’s word postings has spread out all over the place, which ‘proves’ an old axiom of mine, there is no such thing as a standalone passage in the Bible. Pull one verse, one will discover that another verse is required, that that verse my pull in several more, and several more, and etc. The Bible is a completely integrated document, designed specifically to reveal God to His creation.
While each point raised on this cries out for a separate response and follow up discussion, here are a few basic suppositions that must, at all costs, be maintained in order to gain a solid understanding of the exchange between Jesus and the young man.
First, Jesus never claimed, and in fact never did, observe and perform all of the Old Covenant commandments, rules, ordinances or statues. He did, however, fulfill them! Now, that should tweak the Greek’s logical mindset in use by most Bible teachers. This is because we so often equate ‘fulfillment’ with ‘accomplishment’. These are two entirely different things.
To illustrate.
First Jesus (Yeshua) kept only those Old Covent requirements that applied to Him, not to the rest of the world. He never attempted to keep the requirements assigned to the priesthood, to women, or to strangers (non Jews). Jesus never entered a Mikvah (baptismal pool) every lunar month to complete a ritual cleansing after a monthly flow. So, how could Jesus proclaim that He fulfilled all of the requirements contained in all of the demands listed under the Old Covenant? In one word it would be called ‘attitude’.
Yeshua obeyed the Law of God (aka, law of Moses) out of an expressed love of, and for His Father. (Yes, I know the Son and the Father are one, but let’s use scriptural terms and precepts here).
Now we hit the pivotal point of the scripture that started this discussion. The first thing is that that the young man had the good sense to understand that his life of Torah observance was still lacking some critical element (vs 20), in order that he might obtain ‘eternal life’. Thus, as a result he asked the Master what He thought was lacking. And that was quickly identified as the self serving attitude of the young man. Everything he did was to serve self, not God. Observance of the Law was to gain the physical and spiritual blessings and avoid the curses. The observance of the Law was not to glorify God or to please Him, but to enhance his personal gain through religious observances.
Yeshua then hits upon the most visible aspect of the entire motivation of the man, his wealth – and implied, the power and influence that his wealth bought.
In vs 21 we have the conclusion of the exchange, If you would be perfect (as used, of mind and character, one who has reached the proper height of virtue and integrity; also see Mt 5:48, Phil 3:15, Jas1:4) go [and] sell what thou hast [all of your possessions], and give to the poor [(literally, as a noun, meaning strictly denoting absolute or public dependency on charity], and thou shalt have treasure [a deposit, i.e. wealth] in heaven [(by extension) οὐρανός (as the abode of God)]: and come [and] follow me [to accompany as a disciple. What being disciple requires of one is yet another study].
From the Hebrew world view what we have is the conflict between serving self and serving God, a selfish attitude verses and selfless attitude, i.e., serving God out of a desire to express one’s love for Him – in this case, HaMashiach Yeshua, “If you love me, obey me.”
Is it therefore important to correctly understand the acceptable approach to obeying the Law? Absolutely! Next post.
There was a question concerning circumcision (obeying the O.T law). Do Gentile Christians of today require the same circumcision as a Jew did under the Old Covenant Law? The answer is a surprising, ‘yes’.
We modern-day professing Christians discount male circumcision as being an Old Coventant legal requirement that was abolished on the cross. A false doctrine. The required circumcision of the New Covenant is exactly the same as expressed under the old. Reference Deut 10:16, 30:6 & Jer 4:4 (all in proper context) and compare with Roman 2:29 (in context). The question of how Old Covenants (including the Abraham covenant) transition into each subsequent covenant is also another study. For the natural Jew, circumcision of the flesh is still part of the ‘natural’ Jew requirement, along with the not so ‘new requirement’ of also being circumcised in one’s heart. Even so, we non-natural Jews do NOT require circumcision of the flesh for exactly the same reason that Jesus did not observe the ordinances that applied to and required of the Temple priests – they don’t apply to us! Yeshua never served in the Temple on earth as a priest, so none of the priestly Temple laws applied to Him. Circumcision of the heart, however, applies to everyone, no exceptions, none!
To cap this quick overview:
– Revelation 12:17. And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
Here we have the commandments of God and the testimony concerning Jesus (the Passover Lamb, salvation) being identified.
– Revelation 14:12. Here is the patience of the saints: here [are] they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
Obedience to the law of God is not inconsistent with having and exercising one’s faith that originates with the Christ.
– Revelation 22:14. Blessed [are] they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
For anyone who might claim that obedience to the Law of God is no longer a salvation issue, these three verses quoted (KJV] clearly instruct us otherwise. There are numerous verses in the New Covenant writings that support these obedience requirements.
So, what is the problem concerning salvation by grace and salvation by the Law. Yet another study. Observance of the Law for the sake of salvation was and is a wasted effort. Observance of the Law out of love and a desire to please God, that is acceptable. The Greek mindset says that if I do what the law of the New Testament says, then I’ll go to heaven and get all kinds of goodies. A straight cause and effect model of religion. The traditional (historical) Hebrew approach is, God is worthy of my obedience, even when I don’t know or understand why He desires certain actions on my part. The Hebrew [generalized] focus is on ‘how do I please God’, the Gentile view [generalized] is ‘how do I understand God’. The Gentile approach is most frequently, “what can I get out of God”, all of the blessings of the Old Covenant, without a though to the curses associated with those blessings.
There are no unconditional promises in scripture! Every covenant God has made with man (we are now in the seventh covenant) has two sides to its provisions, God’s side and man’s side. It is about time we learn what those provisions are and start observing them.
I hope that this quick introduction is of some assistance to the community.
“this is the New Testament in my blood- drink ye all of it.” Enter Christ. Never did it enter anyone’s mind (including Hasatan!) G-d would become a man. The incarnation of YHWH was a complete and total surprise to everyone- even the twelve who lived in close communion with Yeshua for three years! No one, not one expected a man to be resurrected from the dead. The Messiah surprise them all! Three days later..-new life and a new covenant was sealed. Sealed in blood. This my friends is the blood-covenant of Friendship. For G-d so loved the world. The Jew? -yes! The Gentile- absolutely!
Let us put the horse before the cart. Let us do all things decently and in order. Let us pronounce and proclaim the good news (the gospel) of Jesus Christ. To the Jew first (yes!) and also to the Greek (positively). And friends (of any persuasion) -the blood of Jesus Christ, G-d’s son, (and G-d the Son!) cleanses from all (all) sin. It it the blood we (all) need to be under. We (all) need to be under the blood and “in Christ.” For He (and He alone) is not only our Redeemer, but also our Reconciler. – Oh.. let’s talk about Jesus! -the great “I AM” is He! We will (only) be reconciled by the Peace Speaker- and friends, (Hallelujah!)- We know His name! His invitation? (just a friendly reminder..)- “Whosoever will” may come!- Does this include the Jew? Does this include the Gentile? Does this include “sinners only?”- Yes, friends, it does. Praise His name- when our LORD said “whosoever” -He included me. How about you? Are you “in?” Saved. Saved by His power divine. Saved to “new life” sublime..- Life now is sweet, and my joy is complete..- for I’m saved! Saved from the penalty of sin. Saved from the power of sin. (sin shall no longer have dominion over me!) and one glorious day (soon, I hope!)- we shall be saved from the presence of sin. All because of Who? Let us then continue to “look unto Jesus”- not a casual glance, but a continual gaze- the Author and Completer (He who has begun a good work in you will complete it…) of our faith. One LORD (what is His name?) One faith- (faith in the shed blood of the Lamb) one Baptism (He immerses us in Him- an outward expression of an inward experience, buried with Him in baptism unto death- a “picture” of the death of self, and raised to walk in “newness of life”-
‘behold, (take a good look!) I make all things new!”
This is my story.. and this is my song..- praising my Savior!- all the day long.. Let us together worship the only ONE who is worthy!- The LORD Jesus (who is the) Christ. King of kings and LORD of lords- every knee (including the two given unto me) will bow..- Let us sing with the saints who have preceeded us- “worthy is the Lamb!”
Thanks Carl, absolutely true.
Keep and fix your eyes on Jesus, the Author and Finisher of our faith. He is our hope, and our sure foundation… worthy of the highest praise forever and ever, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world!!!
This to me is really a discussion about the things that might keep us from Him, but thank you much for bringing all things back to Him, alone and always!!!
Skip,
Thanks for your reply….
No corners…. how convenient. I don’t have a field, so I don’t have to let the ground rest. Should we not mow our lawn every 7th year? THAT would be convenient!!! 🙂
You mentioned the 10 commandments… only one confuses me, the rest are all in, as they are…
Is the Sabbath to be only practiced on the 7th day according to the Jewish calendar, i.e. Saturday? …or is it acceptable on whatever day of the week you choose if it is universally agreed upon in your congregation? Obviously most churches and society has recognized Sunday, but that would not be true to the original.
How should I practice this… (in a nutshell… I have had you typing all day!!! sorry bout that…)
Bless you,
Bruce
As much as I would like to continue this discussion because I think it would be helpful to you, all of this is old ground and has been discussed in a lot of detail over the last few years on the web site. Before we continue, it might be best to read some of that information so we aren’t just saying the same things. thanks,
Skip,
You made a statement above that has helped to coalesce a lot of ideas for me. You said, “the issue was never God’s law, the issue was if the Gentiles should become Jews.”
This makes a lot of historical sense with the children of Abraham coming back to the land of Israel from captivity, and their identity and survival as a people had to be strong on their hearts and minds.
Then you have all these Gentiles coming to faith in Messiah, and I can understand the fear of ‘some’ who do not want to loose their identity as His chosen people. There may have been more factors than this but this seems to me to be a very strong one.
Acts 15:1- But ‘some’ men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”
The issue here for these ‘some’ men is that they must become Jewish, i. e. proselytised, in order to enter into the fullness of convenant with YHWH and His people. Would this be a correct assumption?
Shabbat shalom!
Yes, the argument in Galatians, and in the other parts of Paul’s letter that deal with this problem, is that there was an accepted ritual for proselytes to Judaism. It involved circumcision, baptism, Torah obedience, tests, etc. Anyone who wanted to become Jewish had to go through this process. But Paul argues, correctly, that becoming Jewish is NOT the pathway to God’s favor. God’s favor is poured out regardless of one’s ethnic orientation (by birth or by election). This is what he says, and why he says it, in Romans 4. The group of Jews who insisted on believers becoming proselytes prior to worshipping YHWH claimed that God’s acceptance depended on becoming Jewish. Paul argues otherwise, demonstrating that even Abraham doesn’t fit that requirement. Paul does NOT dismiss Torah obedience. Torah obedience is the expectation and obligation of all who follow YHWH. Torah is the constitution of the Kingdom AND the expression of God’s own character. How could one claim to be a follower of YHWH and ignore Torah? But Torah obedience comes AFTER grace, not in order to achieve grace. I do not have to become Jewish in order to belong to the Kingdom, but if I belong to the Kingdom, I must certainly observe the regulations of citizenship. Paul is simply arguing against those who claimed that a person MUST BECOME A JEW in order to be a follower of YHWH.
Thanks Skip for your cogent thoughts.
Amazing to me is those who argue against following Torah are not even engaging with the text of the Apostolic Scriptures faithfully. Torah has always been the standard of His kingdom and the expectations of His followers. When we are faithful to follow the commands, teachings, and instructions of our King, then others will see our good works and glorify our Father in heaven. Our Father wants to invade His creation through the salt and light of our kingdom demonstration.
When we understand the right agrument and context of what is going on in these letters it brings such continuity to the TaNaKh and Apostolic Scriptures. And as such, restores real understanding, so we can faithfully engage with intergrity the real issues that the Apostles are dealing with.
There are two good articles, one from Tim Hegg on Acts 15 and the Jerusalem Council and the other J. K. Mcgee on the Pauline term, “works of the law.”
You can find them at: http://www.torahresource.com/EnglishArticles/Acts%2015.pdf
http://www.tnnonline.net/faq/w.html#Works of the Law
Sorry, that second link did not come through.
http://www.tnnonline.net/faq/w.html#Works of the Law
Shabbat shalom!