Curses and Conditions
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us – for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.” Galatians 3:13 NASB
Hangs on a tree – Paul’s statement about Yeshua’s redemption requires a bit of analysis. It is more complicated than it appears. First, we need to ask, “What was the curse of the Law?” We should note that Paul does not say, “Christ redeemed us from the Law.” What Paul has in mind is not the Torah (a far better choice of words than Law), but rather the consequences of disobedience. The curse is not the standard. The curse is the result of not meeting the standard. So Yeshua’s redemptive action lifts this consequence from us. It does not lift away the standard.
Secondly, we need to ask, “How did the Messiah become a curse?” Clearly Yeshua kept the Torah. He was not subject to its penalty – death. But He chose to accept death as a substitute for us. In this sense, He took on the consequences of our disobedience, or as Paul describes it, He “became a curse.” Paul does not mean that Yeshua became disobedient. He means that viewed from its end result Yeshua experiences the consequence of disobedience.
Now we come to this very odd proof text, Deuteronomy 21:22-23. We should note that the translation “tree” isn’t quite correct. The word “tree” in Greek is dendron, but here (and in four other references) the Greek is xylon which means “wood” or “stake.” The Greek word for “cross” is neither dendron nor xylon, but rather stavros. But in the LXX, the passage from Deuteronomy 21:22-23 uses xylon for the Hebrew ‘etz, and so the New Testament authors who mention this reference choose xylon rather than the more correct stavros. When we examine the Deuteronomy passage we find some rather unusual things. The circumstances in Deuteronomy concern a man who is judged worthy of execution under Torah, subsequently stoned to death and his body is hung on an ‘etz as a visible display of the need to remove defilement from the land. It should be obvious that none of these conditions apply to Yeshua. He was not judged worthy of death under Torah. He was not stoned to death. His dead body was not hung on a xylon in order to remove defilement from the land. So how come Paul uses this Deuteronomy passage to justify his claim that Yeshua redeemed us from the curse?
It’s helpful to read the rabbinic commentary on this Deuteronomy passage. “The second phrase refers to exposing the criminal’s body after execution, . . . exposure served to degrade the criminal and warn others against similar conduct, and was perhaps originally intended as well to deprive him of proper burial. . . This verse does not require hanging the body, but merely reflects the existence of the practice.”[1] The imagery of hanging on an ‘etz is about public shame, a very important element of Jewish consciousness in the first century. Paul uses the Deuteronomy passage, which does not fit any of the circumstances surrounding the crucifixion, to draw attention to the public shame Yeshua endured. He was humiliated for us. But it does not follow that the redemptive activity occurred on the cross. The crucifixion was a display of the shame that accompanied Yeshua’s choice to be our substitute. Paul latches on to this public display in the crucifixion and draws on the public display of Deuteronomy, but the only similarity is the shame involved. We can conclude that the xylon – ‘etz was a place of shame but we cannot conclude that it was also the place of redemption, especially in light of other New Testament passages that describe the place of redemption occurring in the heavenly Temple.
Topical Index: cross, xylon, ‘etz, Deuteronomy 21:22-23, shame, Galatians 3:13
[1] Jeffrey Tigay, The JPS Torah Commentary: Deuteronomy, p. 198.
CORRECTION NEEDED:
David Craig pointed out, correctly, that my first statement in the TW yesterday was mistaken. (I have corrected it – please do so with your copies). The rumor was NOT that Paul was teaching the Gentiles that they did not have to obey Torah. The rumor was that Paul was teaching the JEWS that they did not have to obey Torah. Paul’s action confirms that the rumor is NOT TRUE. Paul never taught that Jews did not have to keep Torah – and in fact, Paul remained Torah observant throughout his life.
But my mistake does not actually change the argument. If Paul remained Torah observant, and confirmed that he did, and this means he did not teach Jews that they could give up Torah after accepting Yeshua as Messiah, then it follows that Torah was EXPECTED for Jews in spite of their acknowledgment of Yeshua and therefore, the claim that Paul revoked Torah is false.
The only remaining issue is if Torah applies to Gentiles. That answer is found in Acts 15. And the answer is YES, after I am grafted into the commonwealth of Israel, I am no longer treated differently than any other citizen of the Kingdom from the perspective of Torah. What applies to me, applies to me. James makes that clear with his comment that all are taught Moses every Sabbath. To suggest that Acts 15 exempts Gentiles from Torah who are now in the community is to claim that God has TWO torahs, one for Jews and one for Gentiles. I reject that view as incompatible with the rest of Paul’s teaching and the instructions of Yeshua.
I have written about this in other places.
Thanks for the correction, David. I have added it here as well as on the blog since it is so important.
Skip: The logic escapes me. “So Yeshua’s redemptive action lifts this consequence from us. It does not lift away the standard.” Is that not a definition of the term “moot?” And if the standard is moot, then of what value is it?
Also, if it does not follow that the redemptive activity occurred on the cross, then on what basis did the criminal hanging next to Him join Jesus that same day in paradise (Luke 23:43)? To me, that sounds like a “Get Out of Jail” card that was redeemed.
I have been without internet here in Africa for 2 days, so I am a bit behind. And it is now 4:30 in the morning, so I will be brief.
When you go to court to appeal to the judge to set aside the speeding ticket that you received, do you ask the judge to remove the LAW do you ask him to remove the fine? If he “frees” you from the consequences of your actions, are you still considered guilty but forgiven? Does you status make the law null and void? If you argue that the law must be set aside, then what are the consequences for righteousness? Does everyone just do what they want and drive whatever speed they wish since there is now no law?
Now, does the logic still escape you?
And one further comment. Where did you learn that the redemptive activity occurred on the cross? Point me to the biblical source of that idea? Then tell me how your idea is reconciled with all the verses that we have discussed here about the Lamb slain before the foundation of the earth?
What if someone told you “You are dying”, you need a brand new blood system, . . . from scratch.
http://myhopewithbillygraham.org/defining-moments/?
For what is your life? It is even a vapor, that appears for a little time, and then vanisheth away.
Receive the new life.
Please.
Abstract Idealist Bible
Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us – for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.”
Complete Jewish Bible
The Messiah redeemed us from the curse pronounced in the Torah by becoming cursed on our behalf; for the Tanakh says, “Everyone who hangs from a stake comes under a curse
Hmmm
In an English 1A class in college, if a student were to use the expression “curse of the Law” in his/her paper, the teacher would put a red circle around it with the following comments
“PLEASE explain your terms”
“The Law is an abstract ideal that can be filled in with any content”
In structural linguistics, as I recall, they refer to constructs like the Law as “empty signifiers”
Exactly. Fill in the blank from the CONTEXT of the culture it comes from.
Skip, I have kept up with your teachings for a long time now, and I have been agonizing to ask one question. That question is based on my perception of what you must believe, which again is based on what I perceive you to teach. The question is involved, but here goes. And if my perceived conclusion is wrong concerning your teaching I will happily accept your correcting me. So, if I receive the New life in Messiah based on His work on the cross fulfilling the law (Torah). And therefore I am free from keeping the law, which means that I am not Torah Observant, does that mean that I am not in the process of change that the New Covenant promises for me– that being that the law either has been or is being written upon my new heart. And if I am fooling myself by believing the way that I do then I must conclude that you believe that 99% of the church is not going to hear The Lord say “well done my good and faithful servant”. If this then is the case in order for God to fill the Kingdom with sons equaling the numbers of grains of sand as the sea or the stars of the heavens it will necessitate at least Billions of years to accomplish these numbers of Torah Observant Believers from both Jew and Gentile believers, well it not? I know I said the question was complicated, but help me out here, because these are my logical conclusions based on what I am hearing you teach.
Jerry, I know you have directed your questions to Skip, and I will not presume to answer for him. May I ask a few questions of you, however?
First, just what does that mean to you, that the Messiah “fulfilled the Law”?
Second, are we free FROM the Law, or free TO keep the Law?
Third, why do you think that the Law is now being written on your “new heart,” when that prophecy clearly places this event as occurring during the future earthly reign of the Messiah?
Fourth, do you understand that Skip has said that GRACE is what allows us to enter God’s presence, and that Torah observance is NOT what saves, but IS the standard for a new way of living, a Kingdom way?
And have you looked at 1 Corinthians 3:11-14 as an answer to your dilemma? God calls. Skip has said repeatedly that we do not question that personal meeting between any one believer and God. Beyond that, however a believer chooses to live, what standard is followed, and what works are produced, all that will be considered by the Righteous Judge. Eternal life is certain; that is guaranteed by grace. But reward? Ah, rewards are determined by works, as this passage in Corinthians indicates. What you have to decide is this: On what basis do you live your “new life”?
I know this is my personal preference, and it surely doesn’t count for much, but I’d like to see folks wait to ask more questions ’till after Skip has had time to reply to the gentleman’s questions.
Thomas, will you, meanwhile, answer just 4 important questions for me?
Hoping you might, here they are:
Who is Jesus ?
What was He incarnated to do ?
Was what He came to do actually accomplished?
Who are those that believe in Him?
And if it were possible to have ask one more, — its to settle my curiosity.
Has Skip answered your own question below, (maybe you two have communicated privately), —
but if not, why do you think he hasn’t answered you?
Thomas Elsinger says:
August 22, 2013 at 1:58 pm
Skip, what about this possibility?–God could have forgiven sins even before the penalty was paid, knowing that the penalty WOULD be paid.
Thank you, Dorothy, for these very good questions.
“Who is Jesus?” I like Peter’s statement–You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.
What was He incarnated to do? Jesus Himself said He came to do the will of the Father.
Was what He came to do actually accomplished? Well, He did say, It is finished.
Who are those that believe in Him? Quite simply, they are His. He knows His sheep.
And, no, Skip and I have not communicated privately. Why didn’t he answer my question on a previous post? Perhaps he was busy. Perhaps he wanted to do more research. Perhaps he was waiting to see what kind of comments others would make, which I thought was one of the goals of this forum. Perhaps…perhaps I should not presume why!
Have a good night, Dorothy.
Thank you kind sir, — a peaceful and safe goodnight to your household as well.
Sorry for the delay, i was out. Jesus, fulfilled all that the Father required in the law for the forgiveness of sin. Additionally He offered the New Covenant, which includes a new heart upon which He can inscribe His laws. It is the same covenant that will save A purged Nation Israel out of Tribulation. We are to obey His Word and His Spirit within us. I honor His word all of it. He is the Word. If I am to keep Torah I would need to keep all of it. I learn of Him through His Word. I am corrected by it. I am reproved by it. I am taught by it. I am made clean by it. I am free in Christ to live above sin. In Him I have equal standing with the Saints. All of the promises and covenants given to the saints are mine. We are one new man in Christ Jew and Gentile. We have died with Christ and are raised to new life thus a new heart a new covenant. If I sin I have an advocate with the Father. If I confess my sin He is faithful and just to forgive me all my sin. I will reign with Him as an adopted son along with the sons of Israel in the kingdom.
The main reason I raised these issues is because of the emphases Skip tends to place on Torah to the seaming exclusion of the New Testament. When he cites the NT it is to prove Torah. I find all of the word to be equally instructional as for life and living. I guess that this is the point if I have one that I feel needs to be made. Torah in my opinion is equal to not above the remainder of the word.
Are you suggesting that the NEW testament is anti-Torah? That is, of course, a thoroughly Christian idea. But where did it come from? Not from Paul, for sure, since he claims to be Torah observant, and in a recent TW, demonstrates that claim by paying for a vow? So, who came up with this idea. Go read John Gager, The Origins of Anti-semitism. Read what Lloyd Gaston said (you can find the quote in a TW). Then tell me that the New Testament opposes Torah!
You have swallowed the bait. If the NT is as Jewish as the OT, then what is the basis of the claim that we don’t have to follow Torah?
You have put words in my mouth. Equal is equal. Antiemetic is anti-God. There is only one faith and I believe only one religion if I am permitted to use that word. I am not anti Torah. I am pro word of God. I consider myself adopted. I refer to myself as an adopted Jew, one with the remnant that came into the way, which was considered a sect of Israel. One of those children of Zion without which Israel is not complete. My concern with keeping Torah is that the curtain has been rent, there is no more Temple until Antichrists day. I don’t feel free in Christ to stone an adulterer, therefore grace must override at least some of the law. At least this much of the law Messiah has fulfilled. We are to keep his commandments, but are we forgiving debts on the seventh year? These are some of my concerns.
And what prevents you from forgiving debts on the seventh year? God?
Sorry antisimetic not emetic.
I do like your answer. It tells me that Gods grace if accepted is sufficient for all breaking of the law in the end — if accepted of course. So I accept that Gods law is the basis on which He judges my sin, therefore it is to be obeyed; however I have broken it by both omission and commission. My only hope of eternal life therefore is through placing my faith in Gods ultimate sacrifice, and not placing my faith in my own ability to keep His law– all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Is this what you are saying?
Thanks for adding to my reply to Thomas. Good stuff. Clearly presented.
Skip you picked the easy one. What about the stoning issue?
And who are you to decide what God should do?
Sorry. MAybe to harsh. I am rushing through London right now.
The point is that in biblical terms WHAT IS GOOD IS WHAT GOD DOES. It is not subject to our Roman-Greek based ethics of moral behavior. Are you willing to live with that, or are you going to require God to issue commandments that only meet your standard?
I agree with you Skip it is not up to me to decide. It is up to God to lead me into all truth. In the case of the Stoning issue The Lord seamed to give us His answer with the woman caught in adultery. And His teaching on adultery wherein He told us that just looking with Lust in the heart constituted the sin, thereby making the heart operation promised with the new covenant necessary for righteous living. This is further supported by His teaching on the hand that offends (cut it off). Obviously from his teachings it is not the hand or the eye that offends it Is the heart– the seat of our emotion that offends God and us if we are seeking to live a righteous life in obedience to Him. I would appreciate you take on this, because I do not think Jesus was disobedient to Gods law when He released the woman, and He would have been had He not stoned her Himself if Torah was His only point of reference for obedience. He being God had every right and the opportunity to uphold Torah at this time had this been His purpose.
Actually, under Torah he would not have been allowed to stone her either. Please read what the Torah says regarding witnesses and culpability. The whole thing was a set-up. (And there is also some textual debate about its authenticity).
I will accept your answer that it was a set up. That seems pretty obvious though it is not stated, but that does not do away with the problem. Jesus knew that she was an adulterer. She was caught in adultery, there would have been witnesses. The only scriptural evidence provided is that she was caught. Besides, God is the only witness needed in matters of sin and the heart. So if Torah is to overrule all other teaching in the Word if God as I perceive you to teach it, why did Jesus as God handle this as He did? I don’t believe that you have answered this except to imply that this perhaps doesn’t belong in scripture. Am I being picky here?
The issue is not the sin involved but rather the Torah requirement that BOTH people be accused with at least 2 eye-witnesses. All those who brought ONLY THE WOMAN, knew this, which is why it was a set up. Where was the man if both were involved? Yeshua knew this. Plus the requirement for punishment is not determined by one man. That’s why Yeshua asks the entire crowd to participate. All the accusers participate. Torah is not overridden. It is upheld. The fact that she was caught does not matter if the requirements of guilt are not met. BTW, it is the same with murder (take a look).
Hi Jerry,
Don’t mean to butt in here, it’s just that Skip is traveling and it’s probably hard to respond.
The scriptures are very specific concerning adultery and the consequences regarding it. The woman couldn’t be stoned because BOTH the man and woman were to be present at the hearing. That didn’t happen. We don’t know what the “real deal” was, we only know that the situation didn’t line up with the requirements of the “law” or torah. Therefore she was neither accused or stoned.
YHWH bless you and keep you……
Ha! I like how you roll Jerry.
Jerry, you surely picked an admirable spot of Scripture to stand upon!
“Where are they? Has no one condemned you?” (v. 10).
Of course they had condemned the poor woman with their mouthy-mouths, but by not following through on the charge (no one was willing to throw the first stone) thus they threw out the case they had brought against her! I love it!
But wait . . there is One left who could still execute the judgment–the only One present who was without sin — and thus could throw the first stone.
Tensions mounts . . . Mercy and sinner stand together . . .everyone else vanished. .
I wonder if she is hopeful at this point or still quite frightened?
The story doesn’t tell us if she had ever heard about Jesus and His embodiment of the mercy of God.
BUT, in any case, she becomes a memorable example of the fact that:
“God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him” (3:17).
Jesus says to her, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, and stop sinning” (8:11).
Perfect opportunity for the law to rule, but mercy overruled Moses law!
from the IVP NT commentary:
Wasn’t it was unlawful to write even two letters on the Sabbath? . . but writing with dust was permissible (m. shabbat 7:2; 12:5). If this were the eighth day of the feast, which was to be kept as a day of rest, then Jesus’ writing on the ground would show that He knows well not only the law but also the oral interpretations.
“O Lord, the hope of Israel, all who forsake you will be put to shame. Those who turn away from you will be written in the dust because they have forsaken the Lord, the spring of living water” (Jer 17:13).
Here “written in the dust” probably means the opposite of being written in the book of life (Ex 32:32; Dan 12:1); those who have turned away are consigned to death because they have rejected the one who is the source of the water of life. Thus it appears that Jesus is associating His opponents with those whom God condemns for forsaking Himself and whom he consigns to death.
The judgment that they suggest Jesus execute on this adulterous woman is in fact the judgment that He visits upon them for their rejection of Him–the One who has offered them God’s living water (7:38-39).
In rejecting Jesus, they are forsaking God, and thereby committing a most shameful act. Adultery is shameful, certainly, but they themselves are acting in a shameful way worthy of death. As reject Jesus always leads to death. forever.
Deu 22:22 If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, [both] the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.
The issue is not about “grace vs. law” as Dorothy seemed to insinuate above. The “law” as given in this passage in Duet. was executed perfectly and justly. ie; “BOTH the man and woman…
Here’s a larger question, how is it that the “accusers” of this woman were so quick to depart and suddenly seemed less eager to press their point? Have you read the section of Torah regarding false accusations? There’s a mindset that insists that the “law” of God is repressive and defunct and will go to any means to prove it. I would say it’s probably because their hides are on the line. At least that was how it affected me when I was at the same place.
Irregardless of the reason(s) behind the actions, one has to wonder why the “modern” religious man, for the most part, doesn’t want to consider what the term “lawless” really means. Btw, it’s not just an “old testament” term.
YHWH bless you and keep you……..
OK,let me try. Delayed due to no internet here, and for the next 3 days, no internet as I travel home.
1. I do not believe that it is possible to support the argument that the cross was the place of atonement — see my extended discussion of this in previous TWs.
2. The “work on the cross” is about the defeat of death. Atonement is accomplished in the heavenly Temple – as Scripture says.
3. The idea that Messiah “fulfilled” the Law on the cross comes from the Reformers and the Greek philosophical basis of the early fathers and is deliberately anti-Semitic. It completely ignores the Hebrew meaning of “fulfill” by redefining the term to mean “finished” rather than “correctly interpret.” It makes a mockery of Yeshua’s own statement that He did not come to abolish the Law and that the Law will not be removed until heaven and earth pass away. Furthermore, it ignores the clear meaning of Jeremiah 31, the only passage in the Tanakh that speaks of the “new” covenant.
4. Keeping Torah HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SALVATION!!! Keeping Torah is about living according to the instructions of the Kingdom. It is a KINGDOM and it has expectations of its citizens just like any other kingdom – except that this Kingdom is eternal. Do not confuse hen with hesed, a very common mistake among Christians. I keep Torah because God asks me too, not because I need to earn His favor. He asks me to because I show myself willing to accept His authority and MARK myself different from the nations so that they can see what He is doing with me and come to Him.
5. You are NOT free from keeping Torah if you want to be a citizen of His Kingdom any more than you are free from keeping the laws of the USA if you want to be a citizen of the USA.
6. The greatest confusion about this topic comes from the fact that the church has adopted a Roman view of LAW, that is, that LAW is RESTRICTION and therefore something bad, while the Hebrew Scriptures view LAW as FREEDOM and therefore something good. I have written about this and taught it often.
7. And you’re right about the 99% except that God is gracious and most Christian have NO IDEA why they believe what they do. They have never asked, “Where did this idea come from?” Have you? Have you investigated the source of the idea that Jesus fulfilled the law on the cross? Who introduced that idea to our thinking and why?
Have fun.
~ For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it ~
~ I had not known sin, except by the Law ~
~ What shall we say, then? Is the law sinful? Certainly not! Nevertheless, I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.” ~ (Romans 7.7)
Did Paul (Rabbi Sha’ul to some) ever (even one time) covet? Not to make light of it, but yes, of course!- and so have I and so have you, if you are honest with yourself. We all want what someone else has at one time or another in our lives. And what about stealing or dishonesty or honoring our parents, or loving one another? Yes, “all of the above..” The purpose of the Law is clearly establish (just the facts) – “all have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God ~
Who among us (jew or Gentile) may make the claim to be ‘without sin?” No, we must confess, (to say the same thing as) and agree with the words of God, “all (including me!) have sinned.
And if we are (all) sinners..- do we find ourselves (then) in need of a Savior? Speaking only for myself (I wish I could speak for you, but alas- I may not!), I am a sinner in need of a Savior!
This IS a faithful saying and worthy of ALL acceptation (by Jew AND Gentile)- Christ (the Anointed One) died for sinners, of whom I am chief!
Our one and only hope is to look to the tslav, the execution stake, the cross of Calvary and ask the One who took each man’s place (and punishment) for His forgiveness. Has anyone ever done this? Ask for His forgiveness? “Father, forgive me for all I’ve done!” and forgive me specifically for…! What were His words? “Ask, and you will receive!”- if I (or any man) will ask Him to forgive me, – will He? Does the son of Man have power on earth to forgive sins?
~ But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins”—He then said to the paralytic—“ Rise, pick up your bed and go home.” `
Never (ever) fear “repentance!” Ask God for a repentant heart! It is the best ‘gift” ever and as we may al remember, the Father ran to meet the one who “came to his senses”- as he drew near to his Father’s house!
~ How blessed are those whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered! ~ (Romans 4.7)
~ For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek ~ (Romans 1.16)
Hey All,
This reminds me of Deuteronomy 21:22 NASB
“If a man has committed a sin worthy of death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree,
וְכִֽי־יִהְיֶה בְאִישׁ חֵטְא מִשְׁפַּט־מָוֶת וְהוּמָת וְתָלִיתָ אֹתֹו עַל־עֵֽץ׃
Deuteronomy 21:23 NASB
his corpse shall not hang all night on the tree, but you shall surely bury him on the same day (for he who is hanged is accursed of God), so that you do not defile your land which the LORD your God gives you as an inheritance.
לֹא־תָלִין נִבְלָתֹו עַל־הָעֵץ כִּֽי־קָבֹור תִּקְבְּרֶנּוּ בַּיֹּום הַהוּא כִּֽי־קִלְלַת אֱלֹהִים תָּלוּי וְלֹא תְטַמֵּא אֶת־אַדְמָתְךָ אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לְךָ נַחֲלָֽה׃
It was brought up in last week’s parsha, Ki tetze, that “hang on” can be understood as “blame” or “that it was hung on the “tree”.
The tree is the key here – the first tree that “chet” sin was hung on- is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil – so Yeshua took us right back to the beginning and died for that “sin” and every sin that grew from that one! Any thoughts?
The tree is the key here – the first tree that “chet” sin was hung on- is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil – so Yeshua took us right back to the beginning and died for that “sin” and every sin that grew from that one! Any thoughts?
Hi Antoinette,
I’m certainly no expert on the Hebrew alphabet, but when I worked at IBM long ago
An old-timer named Chet took me “under his wing” and taught me the “codes” of behavior
A number of years later Skip introduced me to The Book of Creation by Aryeh Kaplan
Who explains how chet (ch) signifies fence, which serves as a form of protection from God
Presumably against sin
Yes . the letter chet has a pictograph of a fence which indicates separation- or set apart, but there is also a word “CHET” with a meaning of sin.
“a word “CHET” with a meaning of sin”
Hi Antoinette,
Thanks, I forgot about that, but then I’ve never been a big fan of the word sin
As you know, the Hebrew word for sin is “chet,” which literally means “missing the mark”
My friend Chet from IBM was an avid golfer, a game in which one often misses the mark
What I like about the missing the mark metaphor is that it is an action
An action that you don’t wan’t to focus on if you want to “play your best game”
Dufner mistakenly two-putted for bogey on No. 18 from 10 feet in the PGA Championship
When asked how he bogied a simple putt
Which would have tied him with the best score ever on that course
Dufner said he momentarily lost his concentration on how to make the correct shot
In short, we most definitely don’t want to focus on sin
We want to focus doing the right thing
And have God’s fence around us for protection
I totally agree!
~ For He has made Him, who knew no sin, to be sin for us; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him ~ (2 Corinthians 5.21)
Amen
I will choose to stay with what is being taught here so clearly well expressed.
“The curse is the result of not meeting the standard.”
There will always be conditions for blessings and curses. Blessings for walking in YHWH’s ways and commands, curses for not walking according to YHWH’s ways and commands written all over the entire Bible.
“But He chose to accept death as a substitute for us. In this sense, He took on the consequences of our disobedience, or as Paul describes it, He “became a curse.””
Yahshua was not cursed as He followed the Torah in every way, did not transgress against it at all, to lay down a right pattern for His Followers to walk and live in.
“The crucifixion was a display of the shame that accompanied Yeshua’s choice to be our substitute.
The imagery of hanging on an ‘etz is about public shame, a very important element of Jewish consciousness in the first century.”
That was what the public display was about, to shame Yahshua publicly for the corrections He put forth according to what ABBA tells Him to say and do, regarding Sabbaths-placing essence on life, on right attitudes, emphasizing on mercy, judging according to YHWH’s Word, humility and compassion; tradition of washing hands in a ritualistic manner; the Temple as a place of blessing YHWH, not a market place, and always to walk in truth and respect of one another, to be salt and light to the lost-
Matt 5.
He was humiliated for us. But it does not follow that the redemptive activity occurred on the cross.
NO, the redemptive activity was in everything He did and taught.
Yahshua suffered willingly for the consequences of our transgression, nailing what was written against us delivering us from the law of transgression and death that we may walk according to the spirit, and not the fleshly nature of which we have been redeemed, to be called sons of Elohim. Rom 8
Beautiful study, Skip, thank you for making it so clear to grasp. Shalom!
I know this is an older thread, but you have to take into account Colossians 2:14-15 here as well. 14 He wiped out the handwritten record of debts with the decrees against us, which was hostile to us. He took it away by nailing it to the cross. 15 After disarming the principalities and powers, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them in the cross.
1. ALL who have sinned fall under the Torah curse, but the Torah also says that anyone who is hung on a tree for his sins is a curse of God = a sign of humiliation & a public spectacle of evil for all to see what happens to the wicked
2. This is exactly what would happen to Messiah Yeshua, but because He is without sin, the exact opposite occurs!
A. He reverses the curse so that all charges against us are cancelled
B. Instead of Yeshua becoming a public spectacle of evil, He turns it on its head… by defeating HaSatan, & making a public spectacle of evil out of him instead!
C. For, HaSatan was already made a curse of God in the beginning when he deceived mankind in the garden
Genesis 3:14a
14a Adonai Elohim said to the serpent, “Because you did this, Cursed are you above all the livestock and above every animal of the field.
Blessings!
Better check your reference to hanging on the tree. The verse applies to a DEAD person, a criminal.