Tag: Jew and Gentile

Jew and Gentile

  • The Messiah is Pro-Torah

    The Messiah is Pro-Torah

    What does Jesus (Yeshua) have to say about the Law?

    Think not that I have come to destroy (abolish) the Torah (“Law”), or the Nevi’im (“Prophets”): I have not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the Law, until all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say to you, that unless your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:17-20)

    The above statements of Yeshua are very troubling for many Christians, primarily because they contradict their theology. Many Christians divide the Scriptures into Dispensations. There was the Dispensation of Law in the “Old Testament,” and now we have the Dispensation of Grace in the “New Testament.” These words of Yeshua are in direct opposition to this theology. Therefore, many resort to twisting His words His words in verse 17 to mean just the opposite of what He said. I have heard it said, “Jesus kept the Law so I don’t have to.” Since Jesus fulfilled the Law, we can safely ignore it. However, after doing some verbal gymnastics with verse 17, there remain further problems with verse 18.

    Personally, I would prefer to accept Yeshua’s words for what He says. Malachi 3:6 tells us, “For I, YHWH, do not change. Therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed.” The Greeks had fickle gods, very moody, and changing with the weather. Unfortunately, the Greek mindset seeped heavily into Christianity. The God of the “Old Testament” was harsh and legalistic. In the New Testament, God transformed Himself into a soft, mushy God of love and grace. Actually, YHWH never changed. He was a God of both Law and Grace in the Foundational Scriptures (O.T.), and He remains a God of both Law and Grace in the Newer Testament. See Deuteronomy 13:1-5:

    If there arises among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and he gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder comes to pass, whereof he spoke to you, saying, “Let us go after other gods, which you have not known, and let us serve them,” you shall not hearken to the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for YHWH your God is testing you, to know whether you love YHWH your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after YHWH your God, and fear Him, and keep His commandments, and obey His voice, and you shall serve Him, and cleave to Him. And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death, because he has spoken to turn you away from YHWH your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust you out of the way which YHWH your God commanded you to walk in. So you shall put the evil away from the midst of you.

    In other words, if Yeshua had actually come to turn the people away from the mitzvot (commandments) of YHWH, then Yeshua would have been a false prophet, and the people of Israel would have been obligated to put Him to death. Eventually there were false accusations against Him that led to Him being crucified. However, none accused Him of abolishing the Torah at the time of His arrest.

    Yeshua spoke to Jewish audiences. In Scripture, He is called “Rabbi,” [1] even by some of His enemies. They recognized Him as a Jewish Teacher of Torah. If they had perceived Yeshua as being “anti-Torah,” He would never have been called “Rabbi” or “Rabboni.”

    When Yeshua referred to the “Law” in verse 17, He was referring to the Torah. Generally speaking, Torah refers to the first 5 books of the Bible, from Genesis to Deuteronomy. However, in Judaism, the term Torah is sometimes expanded to mean the entire Tanakh (O.T.), as well as Talmud and various Rabbinic writings. I believe that Yeshua used the term Torah to apply to only the first 5 books of the Bible, because He also mentioned the Prophets (Nevi’im). As might be expected, the Nevi’im include the so-called “major prophets” (Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel), as well as so-called minor prophets such as Joel, Amos, etc. Jewish Bibles also include the books of Judges, 1st and 2nd Samuel, and 1st and 2nd Kings in the section called Nevi’im (Prophets). When Yeshua referred to the Law and the Prophets, He was referring to these two divisions of the Jewish Scriptures, exactly as was understood by the Jewish community. The Third Division of books in Jewish Bibles is called Ketuvim (The Writings), including books like Psalms and Job. Curiously, Daniel is considered part of the Ketuvim. I suspect that Daniel got bumped out of the Nevi’im because his prophecies about the times for the coming of the Messiah (Daniel 9:24-27) were a bit uncomfortable for the Rabbis, so Daniel got demoted to the Ketuvim.

    It baffles me. Yeshua said that He came “not to destroy (abolish) the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” Then some Christians come along and believe that when Yeshua “fulfilled” the Torah, it was suddenly abolished! My NAS Study Bible would also take issue with such Christians. In their commentary they write, “Jesus fulfilled the Law in the sense that He gave it its full meaning. He emphasized its deep, underlying principles and total commitment to it rather than mere external acknowledgement and obedience.” Excellent! They got it exactly right! And just as in Yeshua’s day, there are some Jews who are fastidious in their external observance of the commandments (along with very legalistic Rabbinic interpretations of these commands), but who ignore the deeper meanings of God’s Laws.

    We also need further definition of the word “Torah.” When the Greeks came along, they translated the word Torah as Nomos, which is the Greek word for Law, which is how it is translated in most English Bibles. However, more accurately, Torah means Instruction or Teaching. Torah includes the mitzvot (laws), but Torah does not mean Law. Perhaps if this term were correctly translated, people might have a better appreciation for Torah. The Torah is foundational for everything that occurs afterwards in the Scriptures. No one can properly understand the Newer Testament without being grounded in the Torah and Nevi’im.

    Regarding Matthew 5:18-20, my NAS Study Bible says, “Jesus is not speaking against observing all the requirements of the Law, but against the hypocritical, Pharisaical legalism. Such legalism was not the keeping of all the details of the Law but the hollow sham of keeping laws externally, to gain merit before God, while breaking them inwardly. It was following the letter of the Law while ignoring its spirit. Jesus repudiates the Pharisees’ interpretation of the Law and their view of righteousness by works.” Many times, I find Christian commentaries to be defective. However, in this case, I am very pleasantly surprised. They got it exactly right!

    David Bivin and Roy Blizzard [2] have an interesting interpretation of Matthew 5:17-18. “The meaning of Jesus’ words is clear. As long as the world lasts, he goes on to say in verse 18, the Law will last. Here Jesus is in complete agreement with the (Rabbinic) sages: ‘Everything has an end – heaven and earth have an end – except one thing which has no end. And what is that? The Law’ (Genesis Rabbah 10:1); ‘No letter will ever be abolished from the Law’ (Exodus Rabbah 6:1).” Bivin and Blizzard add:

    Destroy and fulfill are technical terms used in rabbinic argumentation. When a sage felt that a colleague had misinterpreted a passage of Scripture, he would say, ‘You are destroying the Law!’ Needless to say, in most cases his colleague strongly disagreed. What was ‘destroying the Law’ for one sage was ‘fulfilling the Law’ (correctly interpreting Scripture) for another.

    “What we see in Matthew 5:17ff. is a rabbinic discussion. Someone has accused Jesus of ‘destroying’ the Law. Of course, neither Jesus nor his accuser would ever think of literally destroying the Law. Furthermore, it would never enter the accuser’s mind to charge Jesus with intent to abolish part or all of the Mosaic Law. What is being called into question is Jesus’ system of interpretation, the way he interprets Scripture.

    “When accused, Jesus strongly denies that his method that his method of interpreting Scripture ‘destroys’ or weakens its meaning. He claims, on the contrary, to be more orthodox than his accuser…”

    “Never imagine for a moment,” Jesus says, “that I intend to abrogate the Law by misinterpreting it. My intent is not to weaken or negate the Law, but by properly interpreting God’s written Word, I aim to establish it, that is, to make it even more lasting.”

    “For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the Law, until all be fulfilled.”[3] The “jot” is the yod (y), which is the smallest letter in the Hebrew alphabet. The “tittle” could refer to the decorative strokes that Hebrew scribes often attach to various letters on the Torah scroll, firmly entrenched by tradition. The “tittle” could also mean the tiny strokes that distinguish one letter from another. For instance, the d and the r, or the j and the t, or the k and the b all look very similar, and could be easily confused, sometimes dramatically changing the meaning of some words. The tiny little strokes differentiating the various letters are often extremely important, as Yeshua emphasized. Neither jot nor tittle would ever be passed from the Torah until all is accomplished.”

    According to the Rabbis, when the Messiah comes, he will not only correctly interpret all the problematic verses of Scripture; he will also correctly interpret all the individual words of each verse. When Messiah comes, he will not only correctly interpret all the words; he will also correctly interpret all the individual letters of each word. In fact, when Messiah comes, he will also even interpret all the white spaces between the letters and words! This may sound a bit extreme. However, Yeshua certainly seems to reinforce the importance of each of the words of Torah.

    The first part of this verse begins, “For truly I say to you.” My Hebrew NT on this verse begins, “Kee amen omar anee lachem.” The term “amen” is often used at the end of a prayer. However, in this verse, “amen” is the term meaning “truly.” It has the same shoresh (root word) as the noun for “truth,” which is “emunah.” Yeshua goes to great lengths to demonstrate that Torah is eternal, even more so than the existence of heaven and earth. Yeshua taught and preached in both Aramaic and Hebrew, not in Greek. By using the term amen, he was emphasizing the truth of what he was saying.

    “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” [4]

    Once a Christian asked me if he could eat pork and still get into Heaven. Knowing the disease potential of eating pork, I told him that yes, he could probably get to heaven even quicker! I do believe that some mitzvot are more important than others. I believe that the “Ten Commandments” written on tablets of stone by God’s own finger[5] may be more important than the dietary commandments which are not written on tablets of stone by God’s own finger. Those who break the least of the commandments, and so teach others shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven. Hey, you still squeak in, but at least you made it! That’s the good news!

    But what about those who break the more important commandments that are part of the “Big Ten,” the commandments written on those tablets of stone by God’s own finger? Yes, I know that most Christians believe in the Ten Commandments. Many have them on a wall in their homes. They don’t murder people, and most are fairly honest. They aren’t committing adultery, or most of the other items on list of Ten Commandments, at least not on a regular basis. But what about the Fourth Commandment: Exodus 20:8-11 and Deuteronomy 5:12-15? Of all the “Ten Commandments,” this is the one that God spends the most time with, with the most words and verses. I believe that YHWH considers this to be a pretty important commandment. Yes, I know that many Christians observe Sunday. However, Sunday is not the Sabbath. Sunday is the day that was originally set aside to honor the Sun god. Do we have the right to decide on our own which day to honor as the Sabbath? Shabbat (the Sabbath) was blessed and sanctified on the seventh day of the week of Creation, long before there were any Jews. Shabbat begins on Friday at sunset, and ends 24 hours later on Saturday at sunset. Matthew 7:21-23 indicates that many Christians are on a very slippery slope by deciding to ignore God’s instructions (Torah).

    “For I say to you, that unless your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt. 5:20)

    The scribes and Pharisees had very high standards for righteousness. Do you believe you could reach such standards? I don’t believe you do, and I don’t believe I do. Ultimately, we need the shed blood of Messiah Yeshua, spilled on the cross at Golgotha. Yeshua paid the penalty for all of our sins. However, let us not turn this into “greasy grace,” as an excuse to sin. The NT definition of sin is the same as the OT definition of sin. It is found in 1 John 3:4: “Whosoever commits sin transgresses also the Law (Torah); for sin is the transgression of the Law (Torah).”

    Footnotes:

    (1) Mat. 23:7; 26:25; Mark 10:51; John 1:49: 6:25; 11:8; 20:16.
    (2) “Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus,” www. JCStudies.com, Destiny Image, Shippensburg PA 17257-0310. © 1994, pp. 111-115.
    (3) Matthew 5:18
    (4) Matthew 5:19
    (5) Exodus 31:18

  • Galatians 5:2-3 | Falen From Grace?

    Galatians 5:2-3 | Falen From Grace?

    (Download PDF)

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-4m5351′]

    I have encountered a Messianic Jewish teaching that states that only the Jewish people are obligated to keep Torah, because they are circumcised. Is this what Galatians 5:2-3 really communicates? I am confused.

    “Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Messiah will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law” (Galatians 5:2-3).

    It is true that in various sectors of Messianic Judaism, particularly those which promote a bilateral ecclesiology of the Kingdom of God composing two sub-groups of elect, Israel and “the Church,” that it is believed that only Jewish people are really supposed to follow the Torah. Non- Jewish Believers can keep the Torah if they wish, but it is not required or really expected of them.a Galatians 5:2-3 is offered as a proof text in support of this position, as the non-Jewish Galatians who would be circumcised in the First Century, would apparently make themselves obligated, the same as any Jew, to keep the Torah.

    Is this interpretation of Galatians 5:2-3, a viable one? According to one rather popular Messianic teacher, at least: “Galatians 5:3 is irrefutably simple to understand.” He goes on to conclude, “If the plain meaning of the text is true” then “every person who is not Jewish is not obligated to keep the whole Torah.”b When one encounters any remark or statement, by any Bible teacher, on any topic,c to the effect that something is “irrefutably simple,” “airtight,” “watertight,” or “fireproof”—be careful because this is a very good indication that there has not been enough detailed examination of the subject.d What is required, for adequately evaluating what Galatians 5:2-3 communicates, is not only placing these two verses within a wider scope of statements seen in Paul’s letter, but going into more detail from the Greek source text and adequately triangulating a variety of scholastic perspectives.

    Is it possible that the Messianic Jewish view of only the Jewish people being “obligated” to keep the Torah, based on Galatians 5:2-3, has not probed the text enough? Galatians 5:2-3 are actually not easy verses to evaluate, partially because Paul says “I testify again…,” a clue that he could be repeating remarks previously made when he visited the Galatians in person (cf. Acts 13:13-14:28). In Galatians 5:2-3, we are certainly reading the Galatians’ mail, and are interjecting ourselves into an ancient problem.

    Textually speaking from the English alone, the immediate cotext of Galatians 5:1, 4 gives us some important clues as to the setting Paul addresses, regarding why he is insistent that the non-Jewish Galatians do not go through circumcision:

    “It was for freedom that Messiah set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery. Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Messiah will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. You have been severed from Messiah, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.”

    Galatians 5:1, 4 indicates that the issue in view is the non-Jewish Galatians having been freed from slavery to sin, and by going through circumcision, they would be returning to a spiritual condition that they should have left behind in paganism (cf. Galatians 4:8).e While in other places in Galatians, it is easily discerned that the “justification” in view regards one’s identity as a member of God’s people (Galatians 2:15), the “justification” seen in Galatians 5:4 has to regard the Galatians’ salvation status as well. Those Galatians, who would go through circumcision, are to be considered as having fallen from grace.

    One significant feature of the “circumcision” (Grk. verb peritemnō) referenced throughout much of Galatians—but most specifically here—is how those of both the male and female genders are in view. Galatians 5:3 says, panti anthrōpō peritemnomenō. While it may seem rather strange to us, this clause is best rendered with “every human being who receives circumcision,” as the generic anthrōpos for humankind is employed. Realizing that both the male and female genders are in view, the “circumcision” spoken of throughout much of Galatians has very little to do with a medical operation on the glans penis, but instead has to do with the ritual of an ancient proselyte to Judaism. “Circumcision” in Galatians may largely be considered a shorthand way of Paul saying: “become a Jewish proselyte/convert.” Becoming an ancient proselyte to Judaism involved circumcision, water immersion, and the presentation of an offering (b.Keritot 9a).f Females becoming Jewish proselytes partook of the latter two.

    Interpreters of various positions on Galatians 5:1-4 should be able to recognize that the Apostle Paul is not criticizing circumcision as a medical practice here. What Paul is directly going after, though, is an inappropriate theology of circumcision present within much of First Century Judaism. Being ritually circumcised as a proselyte to Judaism, will not merit one a proper standing before the Creator God. Yet, the Judaizers/Influencers, who had been agitating the non-Jewish Galatians, did advocate that becoming a Jewish proselyte was necessary to be a genuine part of the people of God, and possess eternal salvation (cf. Acts 15:1).

    A standard position that is seen of Galatians 5:2-3, only slightly modified by some leaders in today’s Messianic Jewish movement, is that the non-Jewish Galatians being circumcised would make them be obligated to keep the Torah. This is something witnessed in the views of Galatians commentators:

    • Bruce: “Circumcision as a minor surgical operation is neither here nor there, but circumcision voluntarily undertaken as a legal obligation carries with it a further obligation—nothing less than the obligation to keep the whole law. He who submits to circumcision as a legal requirement, necessary for salvation, accepts thereby the principle of salvation by law-keeping, and salvation by law-keeping implies salvation by keeping the whole law.”g
    • Richard Longenecker: “Paul wants to make it plain that with circumcision comes obligation ‘to obey the whole law.’”h

    There are interpreters who hold the doing of the Torah in Galatians 5:3 as a matter of what identified ancient Jews,i and various others who will look at the doing of the Torah in Galatians 5:3 as a matter of the non-Jewish Galatians trying to earn their salvation. The correct interpretation of Galatians 5:3, regarding the matter of the Torah, has to weigh Paul’s rather severe warning of telling the non-Jewish Galatians that they will be cut off from grace (Galatians 5:4). The doing of the Torah in Galatians 5:3, as only some matter of obligated Jewish identity, does not at all serve as an adequate counterweight to being cut off from grace or salvation. A loss of God’s favor present in Yeshua’s sacrifice is in view.

    Examining the statement, “I testify again to every man who receives circumcision that he is bound to keep the whole law” (Galatians 5:3, RSV), there have been some key suggestions made that the language employed here might have to do with some kind of oath taking. Hans Dieter Betz observes, “The formula of oath seems to be in place because of the stubbornness of the Galatians who, in spite of what they have been told before, remain naive with regard to the implications of becoming circumcised.”j   Ben Witherington III also indicates how “A close examination of Ancient Near East covenanting procedures, including those followed by the Israelites, shows that the sign of a covenant was often connected with the oath curse that went with the covenant, in fact symbolized the curses that applied if one didn’t obey the covenant stipulations.”k Both Betz and Witherington have interjected some thoughts into what Galatians 5:3 may certainly involve, which can better aid us in understanding why the non-Jewish Galatians being circumcised as proselytes, would be tantamount to them being cut off from God’s grace in Yeshua.

    Mark Nanos makes note of “a custom practiced in rabbinic Judaism, wherein the proselyte candidate must declare awareness of the afflictions suffered by Israelites and the responsibility to uphold Torah upon completion of the rite,”l referring to the procedure in the Talmud:

    Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority: A person who comes to convert at this time— they say to him, ‘How come you have come to convert? Don’t you know that at this time the Israelites are forsaken and harassed, despised, baited, and afflictions come upon them?’ If he said, ‘I know full well, and I am not worthy [of sharing their suffering],’ they accept him forthwith. And they inform him about some of the lesser religious duties and some of the weightier religious duties. He is informed about the sin of neglecting the religious duties involving gleanings, forgotten sheaf, corner of the field, and poorman’s tithe. They further inform him about the penalty for not keeping the commandments. They say to him, ‘You should know that before you came to this lot, if you ate forbidden fat, you would not be penalized by extirpation. If you violated the Sabbath, you would not be put to death through stoning. But now if you eat forbidden fat, you are punished with extirpation. If you violate the Sabbath, you are punished by stoning.’ And just as they inform him about the penalties for violating religious duties, so they inform him about the rewards for doing them. They say to him, ‘You should know that the world to come is prepared only for the righteous, and Israel at this time is unable to bear either too much prosperity or too much penalty.’ They do not press him too hard, and they do not impose too many details on him. If he accepted all this, they circumcise him immediately. If any shreds that render the circumcision invalid remain, they do it a second time. Once he has healed, they immerse him right away. And two disciples of sages supervise the process” (b.Yevamot 47a-b).m

    Here, it cannot go overlooked how the proselyte candidate formally joining the Jewish community would have to acknowledge penalties for Torah breaking to be incurred.

    To this, we have to consider how significantly possible it is that Galatians 5:3 includes an echo of an oath commitment that proselytes to Judaism would have been forced to take, in order for them to be steadfastly committed to keeping the whole Law. This certainly does have a precedent, as the returned Jewish exiles from Babylon made a public commitment to not only keep the Torah, but actually be cursed, if they were ever found disobeying any of its instructions:

    “Now the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites, the gatekeepers, the singers, the temple servants and all those who had separated themselves from the peoples of the lands to the law of God, their wives, their sons and their daughters, all those who had knowledge and understanding, are joining with their kinsmen, their nobles, and are taking on themselves a curse and an oath to walk in God’s law, which was given through Moses, God’s servant, and to keep and to observe all the commandments of GOD our Lord, and His ordinances and His statutes” (Nehemiah 10:28-29).

    For the First Century Jewish Synagogue, it is not difficult at all to envision various religious authorities requiring proselytes to make a vow to keep the whole Torah, and in the process for such proselytes to acknowledge curses crashing down upon them for breaking it in any way. Given the significance that many of today’s Pauline scholars have given to Paul’s usage of “works of law” in Galatians (2:16 [3x]; 3:2, 5, 10) and the Qumran document 4QMMT,n it should not be surprising that the Qumran community required its members to make an oath to keep the Torah of Moses, and in the process be reminded that God’s wrath would come down upon any of those who would break it:

    “These are the regulations that govern when they are gathered together as a community. Every initiant into the society of the Yahad is to enter the Covenant in full view of all the volunteers. He shall take upon himself a binding oath to return to the Law of Moses (according to all that He commanded) with all his heart and with all his mind, to all that has been revealed from it to the Sons of Zadok—priests and preservers of the covenant, seekers of His will—and the majority of the men of their Covenant (that is, those who have jointly volunteered for His truth and to live by what pleases Him). Each one who thus enters the Covenant by oath is to separate himself from all of the perverse men, those who walk in the wicked way, for such are not reckoned a part of His Covenant. They ‘have not sought Him nor inquired of His statutes’ (Zeph. 1:6) so as to discover the hidden laws in which they err to their shame. Even the revealed laws they knowingly transgress, thus stirring God’s judgmental wrath and full vengeance: the curses of the Mosaic Covenant. He will bring against them weighty judgments, eternal destruction with none spared” (1QS 5.7-13).o

    It is entirely reasonable to propose that Galatians 5:3 includes an embedded reference to some kind of oath for ancient Jewish proselytes to keep “the whole Law”. The proselyte procedures the non-Jewish Galatians would go through, would be administered by non-Messianic authorities, people who did not believe in Yeshua and would not take into consideration the new status of human beings in Him (Galatians 3:28). (The Influencers’ error themselves, as addressed throughout the Epistle to the Galatians, was in making ritual proselyte circumcision an issue for entry into God’s people, and not faith in the Messiah and His accomplishments.) And in the case of whatever sect of ancient Judaism may have been administrating the proselyte circumcision procedure, Betz notes that to the Qumran community “keeping the whole Torah meant for them additional requirements, which made their observance more radical than that of ordinary Jews.”p More than just observing commandments of the Pentateuch proper, with “the whole Law,” could be intended.

    While being ritually circumcised as a Jewish proselyte, and in the process making an oath to keep the whole Torah, could very well be what is more fully involved in Galatians 5:3—why would Paul be so strident to tell the non-Jewish Galatians: “you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace” (Galatians 5:4; cf. 2:21)? He could have just said something to the effect, “You are misguided” or “You are deceived” or “You have gone astray” here, because being circumcised is surely a Torah commandment—and one which Paul himself says later has value (cf. Romans 3:1-2).

    An extremely important, albeit quite obvious component, to properly understanding Galatians 5:3, “he is under obligation to keep the whole Law” (NASU), is actually reading what the Greek source text says: hoti opheiletēs estin holon ton nomon poiēsai. While most contemporary English translations have something along the lines of “under obligation” (NASU) or “obligated” (NIV/NRSV/ESV/HCSB), these renderings communicate the sense of a verb, when a noun is actually what appears in the source text. While Jews and Messianic Jews being “obligated to keep Torah,” has become a prolific sound byte in some quarters, based on Galatians 5:3—what if “under obligation” is not at all the best translation for what is witnessed in the Greek source text? Not enough interpreters have adequately examined what the Greek actually says.

    The Greek noun opheiletēs (ovfeile,thj), in its most basic sense, means “a debtor” (LS).q While it can mean “one who is under obligation in a moral or social sense,” it can also mean “one who is in debt in a monetary sense,” as well as “one who is guilty of a misdeed, one who is culpable, at fault,” “in relation to God, sinner” (BDAG).r The term opheiletēs appears in Matthew 6:12, where Yeshua directs His disciples to pray, “And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.” In the view of TDNT, “those who accept circumcision are debtors to the whole law,”s and no one can deny how in the KJV/NKJV, opheiletēs is translated with “debtor”: “that he is a debtor to do/keep the whole law.”t (The Brown and Comfort interlinear has rendered hoti opheiletēs estin holon ton nomon poiēsai as “that he is~a debtor whole the law to do.”)u

    The proper rendering of opheiletēs as “debtor” makes good sense, in light of the inference that the non-Jewish Galatians who are circumcised as proselytes will fall from grace. Their motives are clear: they “are seeking to be justified by law [lit. ‘in law’; en nomō]” (Galatians 5:4). Does this mean that these people will find themselves no longer seeking justification in the Messiah and what He has accomplished? It has to mean this, in order for their circumcision to merit their being cut off from God’s grace in Yeshua. If membership in God’s people via ritual proselyte circumcision were only in view in Galatians 5:2-3, then one would expect the Galatians being accused of only being misguided or deceived. Most critical to be recognized, is how the condition of a “debtor” in the Apostolic Scriptures, is often that of a person who lives in an unredeemed condition of sin and guilt. James D.G. Dunn indicates for readers,

    “The play on words between verses 2 and 3 should be noted: Christ will not benefit them (ōphelēsei), but, instead, they will be in debt (opheiletēs) to the law.”v Inevitably in seeking to be justified via their Torah observance, the Galatians will find themselves breaking it, and will subsequently be debtors who have fallen from the grace they once had in Yeshua (cf. Galatians 6:13 on the behavior of the Judaizers/Influencers).

    A picture of Galatians 5:2-3 should be forming, which has: adequately taken into consideration First Century Jewish background, the Greek source text, and the reality that the non-Jewish Galatians who become ritually circumcised as proselytes will be cut off from God’s grace in Yeshua. Consider this interpretation of Galatians 5:2-3:

    • The “circumcision” in view has been required by the Judaizers/Influencers in order for the Galatians to be “really” reckoned as members of God’s
    • Paul says that if the Galatians go through with this, then they will be regarded as debtors to keep the whole
    • Being a debtor to the Torah, could very well have involved some kind of a loyalty oath that the proselyte would have to exclaim, something with precedents witnessed in Jewish history, and with it severe penalties acknowledged to be incurred for Torah-breaking. One who is found to break the Torah then (cf. James 2:10), as a debtor, would call God’s curses and wrath
    • Why would being regarded as a “debtor to do the Torah,” merit being cut off from God’s grace in Yeshua? Because in Yeshua, born again Believers are to no longer be regarded as such He has freed all redeemed men and women from the curse of the Torah declared upon Torah-breakers (Galatians 3:13). To regard oneself as some kind of “debtor to do the Torah,” and if found breaking the Torah incur its curse, would be tantamount to the Galatians saying that Yeshua had not really broken the curse of Torah-breaking via His salvation.

    Galatians 5:2-3 are loaded First Century words, which were delivered by the Apostle Paul to severely dissuade the non-Jewish Galatians from becoming ritual proselytes to Judaism. The reason he says “You have been severed from Messiah, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace” (Galatians 5:4), is because Paul knows that in becoming proselytes, they will make themselves into debtors to keep the Torah. In going through the proselyte procedure (cf. Galatians 3:10), they will have most likely declared that the curses of the Torah come down upon them if they ever break it—which would run contrary to Yeshua’s sacrifice having canceled the Torah’s curse (Galatians 3:13).w The spiritual center of who these peoplewill become focused on justification via the Torah—not Yeshua the Messiah and a steadfast reliance on what He has accomplished. In going through the proselyte procedure, the non-Jewish Galatians will accept a premise of salvation-by-ethnicity (m.Sanhedrin 10:1), and all of the requirements demanded by a non-Messianic Jewish community. They will make themselves indebted to keep the whole Torah, and it is inevitable that they will each find themselves in violation to the Torah—and because they have accepted a premise of justification via the Torah, Yeshua’s salvation will not be there to help them.

    No one, however—including a Jewish Believer—is to be regarded as a “debtor to do the Torah,” because as Paul had said earlier to those in Galatia, “Through [the Messiah] everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses” (Acts 13:39, NIV).x

    It should be obvious that the Messianic Jewish idea one may hear of Jews and Messianic Jews being “obligated” to keep the Torah, which is likely to claim Galatians 5:2-3 as support, has not investigated the original context and setting of these verses thoroughly enough. If as proposed, “debtor” is the correct rendering of opheiletēs (ovfeile,thj), and this depicts a condition of one being a sinner without regeneration via the gospel—then it is obvious that there were some complicated spiritual dynamics in play in Galatia. Paul actually went to the point of telling the non-Jews being convinced that they had to be circumcised, that they would make themselves be in slavery and consequently be cut off from Yeshua. These people were in serious danger of regressing to a Messiah-less condition.

    While historically, verses like Galatians 5:1-4 have been interpreted as the Apostle Paul speaking against the continued validity of the Torah for the post-resurrection era, the targeted issue is actually making sure that one is not “a debtor to do the Law.” While the Epistle to the Galatians is clear that God’s Torah is not to be regarded as a means of justification, we can be agreed that all born again Believers must be following ton nomon tou Christou, “the law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2), which the CJB rightly extrapolates to be “the Torah’s true meaning, which the Messiah upholds.” This is to be focused around Yeshua’s teaching on Moses’ Teaching, principally found in His Sermon on the Mount (Matthew chs. 5-7). Yeshua the Messiah came to fulfill the Torah, He directed His followers to keep it (Matthew 5:17-19), and Paul says in Galatians that we are to fulfill the Torah with love for neighbor being paramount (Galatians 5:14; cf. Leviticus 19:18).

    While there has been a significantly polarized debate in various sectors of the Messianic movement, as to whether or not non-Jewish Believers are “obligated to keep Torah,” Romans 8:12- 13 guides us in another direction: “brethren, we are debtors [opheiletia], not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh—for if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body you will live” (RSV). Born again Believers, regenerated by the Spirit, are not to be regarded as “debtors to keep the whole Torah,” so that they can try to earn their salvation as a legalistic work of the flesh (cf. Galatians 3:3). They are instead “debtors” to the grand work of Yeshua the Messiah (Romans 8:1-3), which carries with it no condemnation and the covering of His grace. Being in Yeshua, regenerated men and women are to have the clear presence of the Holy Spirit within them, but as “debtors” to the Lord and His work, they have no debt of sin from Torah-breaking that needs to be paid any longer.

    Those in Messiah are all certainly expected to obey Moses’ Teaching, but the responsibility of such obedience is with the definite aid of the Spirit infilling their hearts and minds, and is surely guided by the impetus of love.y Those who are in Messiah, and have been spiritually regenerated, are to be regarded as people of the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Ezekiel 36:25-27; Hebrews 8:8-12; 10:16-17) He has inaugurated (Luke 22:20). This includes the promise not only of a permanent atonement for sin and forgiveness—releasing redeemed people from being “debtors to do the whole Torah”—but in the place of being a debtor, the New Covenant promises to provide a definite supernatural compulsion to obey, which only being “a debtor to do the whole Torah” (cf. Galatians 5:3) would surely not bring. As Romans 8:1-4 says,

    “Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Messiah Yeshua. For the law of the Spirit of life in Messiah Yeshua has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.”

    Those who walk in the Spirit, should naturally be those who keep God’s Torah. Rather than being in slavery (Galatians 5:1), one should consider how James the Just says, “But one who looks intently at the perfect law, the law of liberty, and abides by it, not having become a forgetful hearer but an effectual doer, this man will be blessed in what he does” (James 1:25). Following the Torah as one who has been freed from sin in the Messiah Yeshua, is quite different than following the Torah as one who is to be regarded as a debtor.

    Can Galatians 5:2-3 be used to imply that within the Messianic movement today, only Messianic Jews have a real requirement incumbent upon them to keep the Torah, and non-Jewish Believers do not? No one should argue against how Messianic Jews might feel more comfortable and have fewer obstacles, keeping many parts of the Torah (i.e., those areas that much of Protestantism has classified as the so-called “ceremonial law”), given the fact that it is a definite component of not only their spiritual heritage, but their ethnic heritage. The real stakes, though, about following the Torah—and the deplorable complimentarian trend witnessed in various Messianic sectors, on distinctions to be rigidly maintained (and enforced) among God’s people— have a great deal to do with the universal availability of all people on Earth to receive God’s Spirit.

    If all of the redeemed in Yeshua are to receive salvation and the gift of the Holy Spirit, then an obedience to the commandments of the Torah, compelled on by the Spirit, should naturally follow. (Much of this obviously has to occur and be facilitated within the right, local community of Believers—which in some places may be [significantly] lacking.) Yet, with some Messianic Jews claiming that non-Jewish Believers should really not be keeping the Torah, this could be taken as a nullification of the Lord’s decree, “I will pour out my spirit on all flesh [kol- basar]” (Joel 2:28, RSV). Is the Holy Spirit supposed to write God’s commandments on only some of His people, or all of His people? The answers to this question, in the short term, unfortunately, are likely to divide more and more teachers and leaders, than bring them closer together.

     

    Footnotes:

    a This is generally the position represented by Daniel Juster and Russ Resnick (2005). One Law Movements: A Challenge to the Messianic Jewish Community. Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations. Available online via .

    b   D. Thomas Lancaster, The Holy Epistle to the Galatians: Sermons on a Messianic Jewish Approach

    (Marshfield, MO: First Fruits of Zion, 2011), pp 236, 237.

    c There is no statement in Biblical Studies or theological examination that can be regarded as “irrefutably simple,” including “There is a God,” given the series of complex arguments against the existence of a Supreme Being. It may be said, though, that there are various statements which have been made by various Bible teachers or theologians, which are arrogantly overconfident, such as Lancaster’s remarks here, as well as associated statements made by those who would agree with him.

    d Cf. Matthew 12:37.

    e This begs a variety of questions regarding what the “days and months and seasons and years” (Galatians 4:10) were, which the Galatians were accused of keeping. They were tied “to the weak and worthless elemental things” (Galatians 4:9).

    As the relatively new Wesley Study Bible notes indicate: “[Galatians 4:9-10] may refer to religious calendar observances that involve the movement of stars and planets, often believed in the ancient world to be controlled by spirits” (Joel B. Green, ed. [Nashville: Abingdon, 2009], 1428).

    The issue of “days, and months, and seasons, and years” in Galatians 4:9 is less likely to do with Torah practices such as the Sabbath or Passover, and more to do with various ungodly rituals that the Judaizers/Influencers associated with them involving astrology and the occult. For a further discussion, consult the article “Does the New Testament Annul the Biblical Appointments?” by J.K. McKee.

    f “Just as your forefathers entered the covenant only with circumcision and immersion and sprinkling of blood through the sacrifices, so they will enter the covenant only through circumcision, immersion, and sprinkling of blood on the altar” (b.Keritot 9a; The Babylonian Talmud: A Translation and Commentary). For a further discussion, consult T.R. Schreiner, “Proselyte,” in ISBE, 3:1009-1010.

    g F.F. Bruce, New International Greek Testament Commentary: Galatians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 230.

    h Richard N. Longenecker, Word Biblical Commentary: Galatians, Vol. 41 (Nashville: Nelson Reference & Electronic, 1990), 227.

    i   James D.G. Dunn, Black’s New Testament Commentary: The Epistle to the Galatians (Peabody, MA:

    Hendrickson, 1993), 266.

    j Hans Dieter Betz, Galatians: A Commentary on Paul’s Letter to the Churches in Galatia (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979), 259.

    k Ben Witherington III, Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on Paul’s Letter to the Galatians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 366.

    l Mark D. Nanos, “A Jewish View,” in Michael F Bird, ed., Four Views on the Apostle Paul (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012), 181.

    m The Babylonian Talmud: A Translation and Commentary.

    n Consult the article “What Are ‘Works of the Law’?” by J.K. McKee.

    o Michael Wise, Martin Abegg, Jr., and Edward Cook, trans., The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1996), 132.

    p Betz, 260.

    q LS, 580.

    r BDAG, pp 742-743.

    s F. Hauck, “opheilétēs,” in TDNT, 748.

    t Cleon L. Rogers, Jr. and Cleon L. Rogers III, The New Linguistic and Exegetical Key to the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), 430 renders Galatians 5:3 with: “he is indebted to keep the whole law.”

    u Robert K. Brown and Philip W. Comfort, trans., The New Greek-English Interlinear New Testament (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House, 1990), 664.

    v Dunn, Galatians, 265.

    Concurrent with this, the comments of John Calvin, Calvin’s New Testament Commentaries: Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians, trans. T.H.L. Parker (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 94 are actually quite astute and most useful to consider here:

    “He who is a debtor to do the whole law will never escape death, but will always be held guilty. For no man will ever be found who satisfies the law. Such an obligation, therefore, means the man’s sure damnation.”

    Similar remarks are seen by Donald K. Campbell, “Galatians,” in John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, eds., The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983), 605, who says, “The Law is a unit, and if a person puts himself under any part of it for justification, he is a ‘debtor’ (KJV) to the entire code with its requirements and its curse (cf. 3:10; James 2:10).” And Frank J. Matera, “Galatians,” in Walter J. Harrelson, ed., et. al., New Interpreter’s Study Bible, NRSV (Nashville: Abingdon, 2003), 2087, who asserts, “Those who accept circumcision must do all of the prescriptions of the Law, otherwise they will fall under its curse.”

    w The issue in Galatians 5:2-3 does not specifically pertain to the salvation status of Jewish Believers, who would not have gone through a ritual proselyte circumcision. However, it needs to be kept in mind that a Jewish non- Believer, like any other unredeemed member of the human race (cf. Isaiah 24:5), stands under the curse of the Torah.

    Yet, other than just outright denying the Messiah, could a similar situation as is seen in Galatians 5:1-4, in falling from grace, ever occur to ancient Jewish Believers? Such could definitely be the case if various First Century Jewish Believers ever joined a sect like the Essenes, making oaths like those seen in 1QS 5.7-13 to do the whole Torah, and in the process claim curses which Yeshua was supposed to have broken over them via their acceptance of His atoning work.

    x Note the presence of the verb dikaioō (dikaio,w), which the RSV and NASU render as “freed.”

    y Deuteronomy 6:5; Leviticus 19:18; cf. Matthew 19:19; 22:39; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27; Romans 13:9; Galatians

    5:14; James 2:8.

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-2m37id’]

    Original article provided in its entirety from http://tnnonline.net/faq/G/Galatians_5_2-3.pdf

  • Galatians 3:23-25 Meaning of ‘Schoolmaster’ or ‘Pedagogue’

    Galatians 3:23-25 Meaning of ‘Schoolmaster’ or ‘Pedagogue’

    Daniel Botkin provides an understanding definition of ‘pedagogue’ as contained in Galatians 3:23-25: “But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.”

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-4ffbfn’]

    (Download PDF)

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-2c5p4z’]

    Original article provided it its entirety by Messianic Publications

  • Galatians 3:23-24 How the Torah Leads Us to Christ

    Galatians 3:23-24 How the Torah Leads Us to Christ

    This entry has been duplicated in its entirety from tnnonline.net and reproduced from the paperback edition of The New Testament Validates Torah available for purchase here.

    (Download PDF)

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-3kl2ap’]

    How can you say that the Law of Moses is still to be followed by Christians today, when it is quite clear that we are no longer under a tutor?

    Pastor: Galatians 3:24: The Law is our tutor to lead us to Christ.

    “Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Messiah, so that we may be justified by faith.”

    The pastor we are examining is correct when he asserts, “The Law is our tutor to lead us to Christ,” citing Galatians 3:24 as evidence. The challenge with his assertion, though, is not in the need for the Torah’s instruction—and our widespread human inability to keep it—to reveal our sin and point us to the Messiah and the eternal redemption He provides (i.e., Romans 10:4, Grk.). The problem is that (1) when the good news is declared in much of Christianity today, people are only told about the love of God but are often never told about the judgment that is pronounced upon them as sinners, precisely because they are condemned as Torah-breakers (cf. Isaiah 24:5-6). And, (2) it has become far more commonplace in examination of Galatians to read Galatians 3:22- 25 from the perspective of it not speaking of individuals on the road to salvation, but instead of it speaking historically of the Jewish people keeping the Torah prior to the arrival of the Messiah— with the Torah only in temporary effect to be obeyed until His arrival. Scot McKnight summarizes the two interpretive options for Galatians  3:24:

    “The first takes it in an educative function: ‘the law was our pedagogue to lead us to Christ.’ This view is a common, traditional view, which sees the law as pointing out our sins so we will cry out for God’s grace in Christ. But besides the fact that Paul is not talking here about ‘individual experience’ but rather about ‘salvation history,’ he does not teach in Galatians that this is the purpose of the law…The second view is therefore to be preferred: ‘the law was our pedagogue until Christ.’ This view is not only the majority view today but is also contextually more compatible.”a

    McKnight is correct when he informs us that the majority view held among Galatians commentators is that Galatians 3:24 is to be read from the temporal perspective of the Torah being valid “until Christ came” (RSV/NRSV/ESV).b Only by reviewing Galatians 3:22-25 in total can we really evaluate whether an individual’s common experience in coming to faith in Yeshua or the condition of the Jewish people prior to the arrival of Yeshua is most textually compatible. This section of Paul’s letter to the Galatians begins with him informing his audience,

    “But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Yeshua the Messiah [or, the faithfulness of Yeshua the Messiah]c might be given to those who believe. But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed” (Galatians 3:22-23).

    The negative problem that sin has caused has affected “all men” (NASB) or “the whole world” (NIV), ta panta. People committing sin, and rejecting the Creator God and His ways, is by no means an exclusive First Century Jewish problem; it is a universal problem to all humanity (Romans 3:23). Bruce is correct to conclude, “As Gentiles and Jews are ‘confined under sin’ in v. 22, so Gentiles and Jews alike are ‘confined under law’ [in v. 23].”d All people are to be regarded as being “under sin” and “under law”. The verb to describe this condition is sugkleiō, “to confine to specific limits, confine, imprison” (BDAG),regarding how “we were confined under the law” (RSV) or “imprisoned and guarded under the law” (NRSV). All that Scripture (the Torah and the Prophets) can do for people is lay out God’s standard of holiness, righteousness, and proper conduct—yet because of the common mortal proclivity to disobey Him—the most that Scripture can really do is lock us up as prisoners.

    Scripture, to be sure, is not the problem; sin without a definite solution is the problem. The only thing to be experienced in a condition where one is “under sin” and “under law” is to be jailed, as it were, in condemnation and guilt. Thankfully, Yeshua the Messiah has come on the scene, and via His sacrifice offers everyone freedom from this! But, Yeshua’s work is for “those who believe”; if one does not recognize Him as Lord and Savior, then the redemption He provides is ineffectual and such people remain “under sin” and “under law.”

    At this point, though, many interpreters—in spite of how “the scripture has all men ‘imprisoned’ under the power of sin” (Galatians 3:22, Phillips New Testament)—opt for the continuing “we” statement made by Paul to regard only his fellow Jews, and not to all of his audience. So, when Paul says “before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed” (Galatians 3:23), such confinement was considered only a Jewish issue. The clause eis tēn mellousan pistin apokalupthēnai, “to the faith about to be revealed” (YLT), is thought to be taken with a temporal force, with the proposition eis (eivj) to be viewed “to denote a certain point or limit of time” (LS),f hence the common rendering “until faith should be revealed” (RSV). The faith in view is undoubtedly the belief or trust to be placed in Yeshua and His redemptive work; being “confined under the law” (RSV), though, is thought to only be a Jewish issue, with the Messiah’s arrival now abolishing Moses’ Teaching.

    In order to draw the conclusion that the preposition eis means “until,” a reader has to separate out “under sin” and “under law” as being two different ideas: “under sin” would mean the negative consequences of sin, but “under law” would mean Jews having to be Torah obedient (at least at one prior point in history). However, the symbiotic relationship that being “under sin” and “under law” have together—as being “under sin” results in being “under law” and subjected to the Torah’s penalties—is one which is constant and cannot be so easily separated as some interpreters think. Paul expresses in Romans 6:14-15, to a largely non-Jewish audience in Rome, “For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace. What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be!” Not only is the antithesis of being “under grace” being “under law,” but the “we” referred to would be all born again Believers who have recognized the Messiah Yeshua. All people are to be redeemed from being “under law.”

    Alternatively, if Galatians 3:23 is approached from an individualistic perspective, the statement “before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed,” regards the status of all people who were once condemned by God’s Torah as sinners, locked up in some kind of condemnation state before salvation. We should agree with Hegg, who says “it seems most natural to understand the phrase ‘before the faith came’g to mean ‘before personal faith comes to those God saves.’”h Only when people are able to recognize the significance of Yeshua’s faithfulness to die as a permanent sacrifice for human sin, this reality of faith having arrived to them, can they then be shown the great revelation of how faith in the Savior is to significantly transform them and allow them to enter into the Father’s destiny for their lives. This is something that the Apostle Paul did not want his Galatian audience to forget: what it took to get them to truly arrive at the significant faith in the Lord that they possess.

    While many would prefer to take the verb apokaluptō in Galatians 3:23 as regarding God’s plan in Yeshua “to be revealed” within salvation history, earlier in his letter Paul himself uses it to describe how “God, who had set me apart even from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace, was pleased to reveal [apokaluptō] His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles…” (Galatians 1:15-16a). To have the importance of faith actually revealed to a newly saved person, who has just been freed from the guilt incurred by sin and Torah-breaking, is entirely consistent with how Paul himself was redeemed. The initial salvation experience of faith in Yeshua is to be followed with a person being shown even more how significant the Messiah’s work is. It is more appropriate to render the clause eis tēn mellousan pistin apokalupthēnai as something like: “to the faith intendingi to be revealed” (my translation), that which is destined to manifest itself in the redeemed. Paul acknowledges the initial entry of Messiah faith in someone’s life, leading to a greater revelation of what faith in Him and who He is encompasses. The preposition eis can notably also mean “to express relation, to or towards” (LS).j Paul later specifies how the power of the good news is to lead one from faith to faith, meaning that the significant revelation of faith in Yeshua naturally gets deeper after one has been forgiven of sin and grows in Him:

    “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation [to salvation, YLT; eis sōtērian] to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith…” (Romans 1:16-17a).

    A proper view of Galatians 3:23 recognizes that: (1) saving faith is to manifest itself in the life of a Believer, (2) because of such faith one is freed from the imprisoning condemnation of sin and being “under law,” and (3) this results in being revealed a greater significance of faith as growth in Messiah begins.

    Having stated how those who are “under law,” locked up as condemned sinners, must have faith in Yeshua come into their lives—and consequently with the redeemed being shown the magnificent importance of such faith in Yeshua—Paul follows this by explaining a pre-Messiah function of the Torah:

    “Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Messiah, so that we may be justified by faith” (Galatians 3:24, NASU).k

    A majority of today’s interpreters take Galatians 3:24 as being a temporal function for Paul’s own Jewish people. From this perspective “our” means “Jewish,” and “the law was our custodian until Christ came” (RSV) or “the law was our disciplinarian until Christ came” (NRSV). The Torah was the Jewish “imprisoner,” so to speak, eis Christon. Highly reflective of this view, and one who definitely believes that the Torah is not to be followed in the post-resurrection era, is Witherington, who concludes that “the Law as the pedagogue of God’s people lasted only until Christ came. Here eivj Cristo is surely to be taken in a temporal and not a telic sense.”l Such an interpretation of Galatians 3:24 could lead one to conclude that Paul is a turncoat Jew, and he is saying that with the arrival of the Messiah that his own people do not have to observe the burden of having to keep any of the Law of Moses; it was, after all, only “until Christ.”m

    Much of how we look at Galatians 3:24 is influenced by how we look at the role of the paidagōgos, which is invariably translated as “tutor” (NASU), “custodian” (RSV/CJB), “child-conductor” (YLT), “guardian” (HCSB), or “schoolmaster” (KJV), comparable to our English word “pedagogue.” Many examiners are in rightful agreement that “tutor” is not the best rendering for paidagōgos, as there is something specific to be understood from this term in antiquity. In Galatians 3:24, we actually see Paul using a classical Greek term to express a Jewish concept.n The paidagōgos was “Orig. ‘boy-leader’, the man, usu.[ally] a slave…whose duty it was to conduct a boy or youth…to and from school and to superintend his conduct gener.; he was not a ‘teacher’…When the young man became of age, the pedagogue was no longer needed” (BDAG).o In a classical sense, the paidagōgos was a protector who was to guard young boys on their way to school until they reached a certain age. This “disciplinarian” (NRSV) or “guardian” (ESV) would try to instill within them a basic sense of who a responsible citizen was, until they arrived at a point when they were old enough to take care of themselves.

    Within much of the ancient period, the paidagōgos had a widescale reputation for strictness. Betz indicates, “The figure of the pedagogue is looked upon as a hard but necessary instrument in bringing a person to achieve and realize virtue.”p So here, the Torah is not that much more than a merciless taskmaster that has to beat proper behavior into someone. Witherington is more tempered, remarking that this point of view “is much too one-sided. There were both bad and good pedagogues and the latter were not rarer exceptions to a rule.”q Paul is certainly not expecting his Galatian audience to apply all of the possible negative traits of a classical paidagōgos into his usage in Galatians 3:24.

    While strict in terms of discipline, and while various interpreters would oppose this conclusion, the paidagōgos did have an important educational function. As Plato would describe it, “Our sharp-eyed and efficient supervisor of the education of the young must redirect their natural development along the right lines, by always setting them on the paths of goodness as embodied in the legal code” (Laws 7.809).r Dunn argues in favor of the paidagōgos, again while being strict, having a “responsibility to instruct in good manners, and to discipline and correct the youth when necessary.”s TDNT further remarks that the Torah “is a paedagōgós while we are minors. During our minority we are under it and virtually in the position of slaves. With faith, however, we achieve adult sonship and a new immediacy to the Father which is far better than dependence on even the best ‘pedagogue.’…It is a taskmaster with an educational role.”t

    The related verb to paidagōgos is paideuō, which can mean both “to provide instruction for informed and responsible living, educate” and “to assist in the development of a person’s ability to make appropriate choices, practice discipline” (BDAG).u Paideuō is often employed in the Septuagint to render the Hebrew yasar, meaning, “chastise, discipline, rebuke,” and “teach, train” (CHALOT).v It appears in Proverbs 29:19: “A slave will not be instructed [yasar] by words alone; for though he understands, there will be no response,” or “A stubborn servant will not be reproved [paideuō] by words: for even if he understands, still he will not obey” (LXE). Yet, even while the verb paideuō can relate to negative discipline or chastisement, it is used in the Apocrypha to represent the education of someone in the Tanach Scriptures:

    • “Therefore set your desire on my words; long for them, and you will be instructed [paideuō]…Therefore be instructed [paideuō] by my words, and you will profit” (Wisdom 6:11, 25).
    • “If you are willing, my son, you will be taught [paideuō], and if you apply yourself you will become clever” (Sirach 6:32).

    Another related term to paidagōgos is paideia, regarding “the state of being brought up properly, training” (BDAG).w This notably appears in 2 Timothy 3:16, where Paul says “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training [paideia] in righteousness.” Also to be considered could be 4 Maccabees 1:17: “[There] is education [paideia] in the lawx, by which we learn divine matters reverently and human affairs to our advantage.”

    Whether Galatians 3:24 should be understood in the context of the clause eis Christon meaning “to lead us to Christ” (NIV) or “until Christ came” (TNIV) is determined by the value judgment of a reader concluding whether or not the figure of the paidagōgos or pedagogue had any kind of educational role. No one can deny that the paidagōgos was a strict disciplinarian. While Witherington argues that “it was not unusual for the pedagogue to chide or even beat a child on occasion to achieve the desired form of behavior,” even he has to recognize “The pedgagogue did have a limited educational role…”y All are agreed that the Torah function as a pedagogue regards the issuance of condemnation to Torah-breakers, but does this condemnation stir up within condemned persons the need for them to cry out to the Messiah—or did the Torah only have a limited function in protecting the Jewish people until the Messiah’s arrival? The combined disciplinarian-educator can actually be seen when we compare Galatians 3:24 to 2 Timothy 3:14-16:

    Therefore the Law has become our tutorto Messiah, so that we may be justified by faith (Galatians 3:24).

    You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Messiah Yeshua. All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:14-16).

    The Apostle Paul lauded Timothy for how he was raised by his mother and grandmother (2 Timothy 1:5) in the Tanach Scriptures, which are Holy Texts to be employed for paideian tēn en dikaiosunē, “training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16). The Torah and Tanach are going to train people in ways of righteousness, whether they are redeemed or unredeemed, and for the latter such training will undeniably involve chastisement. The Torah, Prophets, and Writings are going to always reveal a person’s innate need for a Divine Redeemer—One whom the Father has provided in His Son Yeshua (Jesus). Paul quite keenly says of the Tanach Scriptures, that they are “able to make you wise to salvation through belief in Messiah Yeshua” (my translation), eis sōtērian dia pisteōs tēs en Christō Iēsou. In 2 Timothy 3:15, the preposition eis involves Timothy’s training in the Tanach leading to his salvation.

    There is no reason at all why the clause eis Christon cannot be viewed as “to Christ.” It is true that a version like the NASU has added some words in italics with “the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ” and the NKJV has the similar “the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ.” These words are justifiably added to recognize the appropriate preparatory role of the pedagogue: eis Christon, “to Christ”—which is comparable to eis sōtērian, “to salvation.” In Galatians 3:24 the perfect verb gegonen (ge,gonen) is used, indicating that the role of the Torah as pedagogue, while something done in the past, still has an ongoing effect for born again Believers. The Torah having once served a pedagogue for the redeemed—a strict disciplinarian for those who have now arrived at faith in Yeshua—does not allow for people to dispense with its instructions. When Matthew 1:21 informs Bible readers, “Now all this took place to fulfill [gegonen] what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet,” are we expected to throw away and ignore the Messianic prophecies now that they have been fulfilled via the Incarnation of Yeshua? Or are we to understand them in a new light?

    There is every reason to recognize the validity of the Torah serving as the pedagogue leading individuals in need of salvation to the Messiah. Yet, even if we were to view Galatians 3:24 from the perspective of the Torah serving as a strict disciplinarian “until Christ,” meaning “until Christ came into our lives,” this should not automatically mean that God’s Law gets cast aside as unimportant. The function of the Torah as a pedagogue is over for those who recognize the Messiah, whether you render the clause eis Christon as “until Christ” or “to Christ.” Stott’s observations are well taken:

    “[T]he oppressive work of the law was temporary, [but]…it was ultimately intended not to hurt but to bless. Its purpose was to shut us up in prison until Christ should set us free, or to put us under tutors until Christ should make us sons….Only Christ can deliver us from the prison to which the curse of the law has brought us, because He was made a curse for us. Only Christ can deliver us from the law’s harsh discipline, because He makes us sons who obey from love for their Father and are no longer naughty children needing tutors to punish them.”z

    While some might want to argue against the view that the Torah is to serve as an individual’s pedagogue—concluding that the “we” Paul is speaking of in Galatians 3:24 is just “we Jews”—the Torah did indeed play a role in the non-Jewish Galatians’ own salvation experience. Paul’s visit to Southern Galatia in Acts chs. 13-14 reveals that he certainly taught about Yeshua from the Torah and Prophets to more than just Jews, observing that He provided a forgiveness from sins and freedom that the Torah could not provide (Acts 13:38-39, 43).

    In various sectors of today’s Messianic movement, Galatians 3:24 has been viewed from the perspective of a young man or young woman being prepared for bar/bat mitzvah.aa In Judaism, boys and girls are taught the commandments of the Torah from their infancy. The commandments are rigorously instilled in them so that by the time they reach puberty, usually by the age of 12 or 13, one who goes through his bar/bat mitzvah recognizes that he is accountable for being a member of the Jewish community. While it is now traditional to hold festivities and parties for bar/bat mitzvah, the First Century historian Josephus recorded, “when I was a child, and about fourteen years of age, I was commended by all for the love I had to learning; on which account the high priests and principal men of the city came then frequently to me together, in order to know my opinion about the accurate understanding of points of the law” (Life 1.9).bb A major role in a bar/bat mitzvah ceremony (or even in a Protestant Christian denomination confirming a youth as a church member) is so that young people arrive at the point of being aware of their responsibilities before God, and that they have an understanding of the Scriptures.

    The practice of preparing a youth for bar/bat mitzvah is to instill in the boy or girl the understanding that he or she is accountable for living up to the Torah’s standards. The Torah up to this point serves as the person’s tutor or schoolmaster, and hopefully when the youth gets up to the bema to read from the Torah scroll, he or she has an understanding that this is very serious in the eyes of the God of Israel. In a Messianic context, we surely hope that a young person undergoing bar/bat mitzvah has truly come to that moment where he or she realizes that the Torah is not enough, and that it is the Lord Yeshua to which its instructions inevitably point.

    In the view of Galatians 3:24, God’s Law as pedagogue is to rigorously instill within us a sense of His holiness and righteousness, but our innate inability to ultimately keep its commandments perfectly should lead us to faith in the Messiah. When salvation from our sin comes, the key principles of God’s Torah are to certainly remain instilled with us. As we then grow and mature in such salvation, with the New Covenant promise of the Torah being supernaturally transcribed on our hearts now in play (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Ezekiel 36:25-27), we can fufill the Torah in emulation of Messiah Yeshua (Matthew 5:17-19), surely demonstrating it in action via good works of mercy and kindness toward others.

    Pastor: Galatians 3:25: Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

    “But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.”

    While the pastor has chosen to look at the role of the Torah as preparatory for the Messiah, “to lead us to Christ” (Galatians 3:24, NASU), which is quite admirable given the scope of positions against it—he draws the further conclusion from Galatians 3:25, “Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.” Much of how we approach the meaning of hupo paidagōgon (u`po. paidagwgo,n) or “under a tutor” regards how we conclude what a paidagōgos actually is. The thought of many is that this means no longer being “under the supervision of the law” (NIV), and that God’s people should not be concerned about keeping God’s Law. Is this a valid approach to Galatians 3:25?

    In the previous remarks on Galatians 3:24, we have described how the ancient classical figure of the paidagōgos is like a strict disciplinarian. While having an educational role for those on the road to saving faith, the paidagōgos is still going to condemn a person more often than not. Paul’s word “But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a pedagogue” (Galatians 3:25, my translation), should be understood from the perspective that after a person has arrived at salvation in the Messiah Yeshua, the Torah’s function as a paidagōgos is over. Bruce ably comments, “with the coming of faith believers have come of age and no longer require to be under the control of a slave-attendant: u`po. paidagwgo,n has the same sense as u`po. no,mon in v. 23.”cc A fulfillment of the Torah in acts of love, focused around the fruit of the Spirit, is clearly to begin (Galatians 5:14-6:2). For the redeemed, the function of God’s Torah only condemning people with guilt because of their disobedience has ended.

    In what context are born again Believers no longer “under a tutor”? If we are in the faith and have reached a point of spiritual maturity where we know what the Torah tells us is right and wrong, and we have repented of our sins and been spiritually regenerated, we have no need for the Torah to serve as a paidagōgos. We have no need for this kind of rigorous training, because if we have experienced the new birth we naturally want to obey our Heavenly Father through the empowerment of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit will convict us and remind us as we study the Scriptures, as we pray, and as we sincerely seek the Lord about what we should and should not be doing. For those truly saved and earnestly seeking the Lord, the Torah no longer serves as a schoolmaster, because we should be naturally following God’s commandments as an outward part of our walk of faith.

    The Jewish philosopher Philo also expressed how “there is an undying law set up and established in the nature of the universe…that instruction is a salutary and saving thing, but that ignorance is the cause of disease and destruction” (On Drunkenness 141).dd The goal of any kind of instruction given by God is to be salvation, especially as human beings understand their limitations in light of His eternal holiness and perfection. And while it is most imperative for our mortal inability to fully obey the Lord to drive us to the cross of Yeshua in confession and repentance, instruction in sanctification is to truly follow being saved as the Holy Spirit takes up residence within us and transforms us to be more like Him. Some of this involves further discipline (1 Corinthians 11:32; Hebrews 12:6; cf. Proverbs 3:12) when we err, but it also involves opportunities for God’s people to simply demonstrate His good character to others (1 Thessalonians 2:10).

    In order for the Law to have actually once functioned as an individual’s tutor or pedagogue: people have to know it. Where in mainstream Christianity today are the commandments of the Torah really taught to even lead people to faith? Are God’s commandments being taught in Sunday school so that the youth can know that they are sinners and that they need a Redeemer? Surely if they were in greater numbers than they currently are, some of the moral dilemmas that the contemporary Church faces would not be present. Unfortunately, the “salvation history” reading of Galatians 3:22-25 has done much of the current generation a serious disservice: Christian people are really not being instructed in the Law of Moses. The role that the Torah plays, or has played, in seeing Yeshua arrive onto the scene of history and into the lives of the redeemed—is not that appreciated. Hegg offers us some key observations:

    “[I]n the metaphor Paul uses, when one has arrived at the teacher, one does not therefore despise the pedagogue who lead him there! If anything, one is more appreciative of the custodian because he has performed his duties faithfully. In the same way, when a sinner comes to realize that he is unable to remedy himself of his guilt, and when the Torah leads the sinner to Yeshua, the only remedy for sin, he is forever grateful for the role of the Torah in leading to Yeshua. Far from considering the Torah to have been worthless, he recognizes the strategic role it has played.”ee

    Indeed, as redeemed Believers are no longer “under a tutor,” we should nonetheless be most grateful that the Torah-function as pedagogue has led us to the Divine Savior, Yeshua the Messiah. Following our salvation, we should demonstrate the appropriate respect, honor, and obedience that is due Moses’ Teaching.ff

     

    Endnotes:

    a Scot McKnight, NIV Application Commentary: Galatians (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 183.

    b Including, but not limited to: Bruce, Galatians, 183; Richard N. Longenecker, Word Biblical Commentary: Galatians, Vol. 41 (Nashville: Nelson Reference & Electronic, 1990), pp 148-149; Hansen, pp 107-109; Witherington, Galatians, pp 268-269; Hays, in NIB, 11:269-270.

    c Grk. ek pisteōs Iēsou Christou. 

    d Bruce, Galatians, 182.

    e BDAG, 952.

    f LS, 231.

    g Grk. Pro tou de elthein tēn pistin; “before the coming of the faith” (YLT), something akin to the “arrival” of Messiah faith in someone’s life.

    h Hegg, Galatians, 128.

    i Grk. mellousan.

    I have chosen to render the verb mellō here along the lines of “to be inevitable, be destined, inevitable,” which for Galatians 3:23 is specifically noted for “w. aor. inf. avpokalufqh/nai that is destined (acc. to God’s will) to be revealed” (BDAG, 628).

    j LS, 231.

    k New English Bible (Oxford and Cambridge: Oxford and Cambridge University Presses, 1970), NT p 241 has “the law was a kind of tutor in charge of us until Christ should come,” but notes the alternate rendering “Or a kind of tutor to conduct us to Christ.”

    l Witherington, Galatians, 269.

    m Longenecker, Galatians, 149 does notably speak against this, claiming that “One may, of course, as a Jew continue to live a Jewish nomistic lifestyle for cultural, national, or pragmatic reasons. To be a Jewish believer in Jesus did not mean turning one’s back on one’s own culture or nation,” although he unfortunately further argues that things like circumcision or the dietary laws have nothing to do with “the life of faith.”

    n The term “pedagogue” does appear as a borrowed term in some Jewish literature (Ibid., pp 146-148).

    o BDAG, 748.

    p Betz, 177.

    q Witherington, Galatians, 263.

    r Plato: The Laws, trans. Trevor J. Saunders (London: Penguin Books, 1970), 253.

    s Dunn, Galatians, pp 198-199.

    t G. Bertram, “education, instruction,” in TDNT, 757.

    u BDAG, 749.

    v CHALOT, 137.

    w BDAG, 749.

    x Grk. estin hē tou nomou paideia.

    y Witherington, Galatians, 265.

    z John R.W. Stott, The Message of Galatians (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1986), 98.

    aa Cf. Ariel and D’vorah Berkowitz, Torah Rediscovered (Lakewood, CO: First Fruits of Zion, 1996), pp 23-24.

    bb The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged, 1. 

    cc Bruce, Galatians, 183.

    dd The Works of Philo: Complete and Unabridged, 219; cf. Noah’s Work As a Planter 144.

    ee Hegg, Galatians, 130.

    ff For a further discussion of these and the relevant surrounding passages, consult the author’s article “The Message of Galatians” and his commentary Galatians for the Practical Messianic.

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-3093zl’]

    Original article provided it its entirety by TNN Online.

  • What do Paul’s Letters Really Say?

    What do Paul’s Letters Really Say?

    Marcion was an early Christian bishop who taught that the entire Old Testament should be rejected, and that Paul was the only apostle that could be trusted. Is the ghost of Marcion still at large in the Church today?

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-3zitv3′]

    (Download PDF)

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-2kjp1r’]

    Original article provided it its entirety by Messianic Publications

  • A Torah Positive Summary of Galatians

    A Torah Positive Summary of Galatians

    By Ariel Berkowitz

    Any discussion on the subject of Torah almost always mentions Sha’ul’s Letter to the Galatians. Many assert that this letter absolutely prohibits the practices of the first five books of the Bible by believers in Yeshua or that the Torah can have a meaningful place in the everyday life of the believer. Because of this thinking we thought it would be helpful to present a different approach to the Book of Galatians, one which we think is more in tune with the tenor of the rest of Scripture.

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-4aa4ra’]

    (Download PDF)

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-2ksp46′]

    Original article provided it its entirety by Messianic Publications

  • Investigating Galatians: A four part series

    Investigating Galatians: A four part series

    This four-part series provides an excellent in-depth investigation into the book of Galatians from a pro-torah perspective. Several questions are addressed to include: Was the apostle Paul against the Law? What was the point of God’s Law? Is there to be a different law for Jew and Gentile?

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-47jjde’]

    Part 1:

    (Download MP3)]

    Part 2:

    (Download MP3)

    Part 3:

    (Download MP3)

    Part 4:

    (Download MP3)

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-2u57b6′]

    Original sermon provided by http://www.borntowin.net

  • Ephesians 2:14-15: What has been abolished?

    Ephesians 2:14-15: What has been abolished?

    (Download PDF)

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-3tlkdn’]

    How can you say that the Law of Moses is still to be followed by Christians today, when it is quite clear that the Law of commandments has been abolished?

     Pastor: Ephesians 2:14-15: The Law was abolished in the flesh of Christ.

    “For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace.”

    Ephesians 2:14-15 are challenging verses for many within the Messianic movement, with few being able to even respond to the pastor’s remark “The Law was abolished in the flesh of Christ.” If in Ephesians 2:14-15 the Apostle Paul is saying that Yeshua the Messiah abolished the Torah of Moses, then this would be in flat contradiction of the Savior’s own words regarding fulfillment of the Torah (Matthew 5:17-19)—yet no one can deny the significance of how in Him a “one new humanity” (NRSV/CJB/TNIV) composed of Jewish and non-Jewish Believers must emerge, a clear testament of His grand salvation for all people. We need to look at Ephesians 2:14- 15 a bit more closely, and keep in mind what kind of law is being specifically addressed here. Is God’s Torah actually a cause of enmity or hostility for people, or might something else be in mind?

    Immediately previous in Ephesians 2:11-13, Paul asserts how those of his largely non- Jewish audience in Asia Minora had once been separate from the One True God, and consequently also separate from Israel. This, however, is a status which has been reversed with the arrival of the Messiah Yeshua into their lives:

    “Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called ‘Uncircumcision’ by the so-called ‘Circumcision,’ which is performed in the flesh by human hands—remember that you were at that time separate from Messiah, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Messiah Yeshua you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Messiah” (Ephesians 2:11-13).

    Speaking of the non-Jewish Believers, Paul says that prior to their faith in Yeshua, they had once been “excluded” (NASU) or “alienated” (RSV) from the Commonwealth of Israel (tēs politeias tou Israēl). They had been without any hope of salvation. Yet, being found in Yeshua they have been “brought near” (cf. Deuteronomy 4:7; Isaiah 56:3; Psalm 148:14) and into Israel as a direct result of salvation. They possess a citizenship which their trespasses and sins once barred them from having, and as Paul further explains in Ephesians 3:6, “the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Messiah Yeshua through the gospel.” All people are to be reckoned as a part of the same community of Israel in Israel’s Messiah. This is significant to the point that the reconciliation of once hostile Jewish and non-Jewish people to one another, composing the Body of Messiah, is to serve as a sign of the further redemption to come to the cosmos (Ephesians 3:10).

    Paul’s attestation in Ephesians 2:14 is not too difficult to comprehend: “For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall.” There was something that specifically represented the division between the Jewish people and the nations in the First Century, which had to be broken down, in a manner of speaking. Certainly, there is no shortage of quotations to be seen in ancient Jewish literature, as well as various Greek and Roman works, detailing the great amount of ungodly prejudice and negativity present—which the Apostles and early Believers all had to work against in sharing the good news of Yeshua to all who would hear. What needed to be torn down is labeled by Paul to be “the barrier of the dividing wall,” to mesotoichon. Only when such a wall is torn down, in the hearts of people, can the true shalom or all-encompassing peace of the Lord be manifest.b What this dividing wall is specifically supposed to be is a cause of much dispute among interpreters, especially given the following word:

    “[B]y abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances…” (Ephesians 2:15a).

    By His sacrifice on the tree, Yeshua the Messiah has specifically abolished tēn echthran or “the hostility” (NRSV). Christopher J.H. Wright reminds us what the actual issue in view is: “to remove the barrier of enmity and alienation between Jew and Gentile, and by implication all forms of enmity and alienation…The cross is the place of reconciliation, to God and one another.”c In rendering this negative condition inoperative, many readers automatically conclude that the regulations of the Law of Moses are what stood in the way of the Jewish people and the nations, causing great problems, and so the Torah needed to be abolished. Before we jump to the immediate conclusion that all Christian interpreters everywhere have viewed Ephesians 2:15a speaking of all of the Torah, there are in fact several distinct options put forward:

    • This “law” is the totality of the Torah.
    • This “law” composes the ceremonial commandments of the Torah, particularly in relation to the regulations of clean and unclean. Or, it composes the death penalty for high crimes in the Torah (cf. Colossians 2:14). This “law” does not compose the moral or ethical commandments of the Torah.
    • This “law” is a reference to what caused the dividing wall seen in the Jerusalem Temple (Josephus Antiquities of the Jews 417; Wars of the Jews 194), derived from various inappropriate interpretations of Torah commandments. This would constitute “law,” but not law of Mosaic origin (cf. Mark 7:6-7).

    While the first view is one which looks disfavorably upon the Torah, the second and third views tend to look favorably upon the Torah to an extent.

    The second view is generally adhered to among Christian Old Testament theologians, who still have a highly favorable view of the Torah’s moral and ethical commandments, and the Ten Commandments especially, which are to always be followed by God’s people in any generation. In his book The Message of the Cross, Derek Tidball specifies that the so-called “moral law” of God could not be abolished or intended here, per the words of the Messiah Himself:

    “The ‘barrier’ or ‘dividing wall’ might allude to the wall that separated the court of the Gentiles from the inner courts of the temple, which were to be entered only by Jews. It prevented Gentiles from going further and warned them that they took their lives into their own hands if they did….Christ did not abolish the moral law by rendering it no longer relevant. If Paul were claiming that, he would be contradicting Christ’s own teaching. But on the cross Christ did nullify the condemnation this law brings us under when we break it, by removing the penalty of our disobedience from us and bearing it himself. He nullified the ceremonial law, abolishing its regulations through fulfilling it in himself, thus making them an anachronism. Because he did so, these laws can no longer exercise their divisive powers.”d

    There are many interpreters who continue to hold to the view that only the “ceremonial law” was rendered inoperative via Yeshua’s sacrifice. Kaiser is one who holds to this view, and he does validly note, “Had the law in its entirety been intended in this ‘abolishment,’ Ephesians 6:2 would be somewhat of an embarrassment: ‘Honor your father and mother.’”e   It would be absolutely ridiculous for Paul to consider that the Torah as a whole has been abolished, especially if he later must appeal to its instruction in the same letter! Christian interpreters who have a high view of the Torah do rightly point out that Ephesians 2:15 has to be balanced in view of Matthew 5:17 and Romans 3:31. They are also keen to point out that removing the Tanach or Old Testament from a modern Christian’s regimen of discipleship has had disastrous moral consequences, being right to assert that things like the Ten Commandments were to keep Ancient Israel rightfully separated from the pagan nations around them.

    The third view concurs with the imagery of the Temple of God, “a holy temple in the Lord” (Ephesians 2:21), that Paul considers the Body of Messiah to be, with the Jerusalem Temple made as an obvious point of comparison. And, there was definitely a barricade that was present in the Jerusalem Temple which separated the Court of the Gentiles from the inner court, the latter only being accessible to Jews and proselytes. The First Century historian Josephus testified to this:

    “Thus was the first enclosure. In the midst of which, and not far from it, was the second, to be gone up to by a few steps; this was encompassed by a stone wall for a partition, with an inscription, which forbade any foreigner to go in, under pain of death” (Antiquities of the Jews 15.417).

    “[T]here was a partition made of stone all round, whose height was three cubits: its construction was very elegant; upon it stood pillars at equal distances from one another, declaring the law of purity, some in Greek, and some in Roman letters, that ‘no foreigner should go within that sanctuary’” (Wars of the Jews 5.194).g

    Here, we see that this dividing wall which was erected between the Court of the Gentiles and the inner court included signs that any unauthorized person passing through would be executed, presumably on sight. S. Westerholm explains, “at regular intervals were placed slabs with inscriptions in Greek and Latin forbidding Gentiles, on pain of death, to go further…It has often been suggested that Eph. 2:14 (the ‘dividing wall of hostility’) contains an allusion to this barrier” (ISBE).h This was a barrier that separated Jews from both non-Jews and women. Francis Foulkes attests, “Christ had now broken down the barrier between Jews and Gentiles, of which that dividing wall in the temple was a symbol.”i Bruce further observes,

    “This was indeed a material barrier keeping Jews and Gentiles apart…Whatever the readers may or may not have recognized…it should be remembered that the temple barrier in Jerusalem played an important part in the chain of events which led to Paul’s [imprisonment]…That literal ‘middle wall of partition,’ the outward and visible sign of the ancient cleavage between Jew and Gentile, could have come very readily to mind in this situation.”j

    If the dividing wall in the Jerusalem Temple is what Paul has in mind as being torn down in the Messiah, it certainly begs the question whether the erection of such a wall was God’s original intention. Some say that it was a natural application of the Torah,k keeping Israel separated from the nations. Yet, does the erection of to mesotoichon in Ephesians 2:14-15 fit well with the missional imperatives upon God’s people seen in the Tanach (Old Testament)? When the Lord called Israel as a nation of priests unto Him (Exodus 19:6)—intermediaries between Him and the world—would erecting barriers to keep outsiders out be a part of that call? It was, after all, to be Israel’s obedience to God’s Torah that would make them wise in the eyes of the other nations (Deuteronomy 4:6), and by seeing Israel blessed then other nations would flock to inquireabout Him!

    At the dedication of the First Temple, the prayer of King Solomon is that the nations would hear of the fame of Israel’s God, and stream toward the Temple and come to know Him:

    “Also concerning the foreigner who is not of Your people Israel, when he comes from a far country for Your name’s sake (for they will hear of Your great name and Your mighty hand, and of Your outstretched arm); when he comes and prays toward this house, hear in heaven Your dwelling place, and do according to all for which the foreigner calls to You, in order that all the peoples of the earth may know Your name, to fear You, as do Your people Israel, and that they may know that this house which I have built is called by Your name” (1 Kings 8:41-43).

    The eschatological vision of the Temple is that all nations would stream toward it, joining themselves to the Lord and serving Him:

    “Also the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD, to minister to Him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be His servants, every one who keeps from profaning the sabbath and holds fast My covenant; even those I will bring to My holy mountain and make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be acceptable on My altar; for My house will be called a house of prayer for all the peoples” (Isaiah 56:6-7).l

    Did the Torah truly bring about a hostility between Paul’s Jewish people and the nations? Did the construction of the Temple purposefully create a division between Israel and the nations? You will note that there is no Torah commandment regarding the construction of a dividing wall in God’s sanctuary, nor would such an ideology be supported anywhere in the Tanach. The purpose of constructing the Temple was l’ma’an yeid’un kol-amei ha’eretz et-shemkha l’yir’ah otkha, “Thus all the peoples of the earth will know Your name and revere You” (1 Kings 8:43, NJPS). The Temple was built to be a place for God’s glory to be manifest, and for the fame of the Creator to reach beyond the people of Israel! As Isaiah says, it was to be beit-tefilah yiqarei l’kol-ha’amim, “[a] house of prayer called for all the peoples” (Isaiah 56:6, my translation).

    The debate over the dividing wall to be torn down in Yeshua, ultimately regards how one chooses to view the clause:

    ton nomon tōn entolōn en dogmasin

    This clause is invariably rendered as something along the lines of “the law with its commandments and regulations” (NIV), “the law of commandments expressed in ordinances” (ESV), or “the law with its rules and regulations” (REB).m Ton nomon tōn entolōn en dogmasin literally “the law of commandments in decrees” (Witherington),n with the NASU rendering of “the Law of commandments contained in ordinances,” being probably the most literal that you will be able to find among mainline versions.

    The singular entolē means “a mandate or ordinance, command,” and can be used “of commandments of OT law” (BDAG),o even though this is not a strict necessity. In a secular sense entolē was used “as the command of a king or official” or “as the instruction of a teacher” (TDNT).p

    What dogma pertains to is slightly more complex, as it can be both “a formal statement concerning rules or regulations that are to be observed” and “something that is taught as an established tenet or statement of belief, doctrine, dogma” (BDAG).q Dogma is not used at all in the Septuagint translation of the Pentateuchal books to describe any category of Torah commandments. It principally appears in the Book of Daniel to describe the decrees of the Babylonians and the Persians (Daniel 2:13; 3:10, 12; 4:6; 6:9ff, 13f, 16, 27; cf. Acts 17:7), as it can certainly be referring to “an imperial declaration” (BDAG).r Wayne E. Ward further indicates, in Baker’s Dictionary of Theology:

    “[T]he word designates a tenet of doctrine authoritatively pronounced. In the LXX dogma appears in Esth. 3:9; Dan. 2:13 and 6:8 for a degree issued by the king. In Luke 2:1 it is the decree of Caesar Augustus, in Acts 16:4 the decrees laid down by the apostles, in Col. 2:14 and Eph. 2:15 the judgments of the law against sinners, which Jesus triumphed over in the cross.”s

    In the Apocrypha an apostate Jew is said to leave all of tōn patriōn dogmatōn or “the ancestral traditions” (3 Maccabees 1:3), and a brother who is martyred testifies to have been raised on dogmasin or various “teachings” (4 Maccabees 10:2), neither of which has to be the Torah/Pentateuch proper. Given these examples, you should see some interpretational possibilities open to us as Messianic Believers, especially per Yeshua’s word that He came to not abolish the Law of Moses (Matthew 5:17-19; Luke 16:17).

    I would propose that a more correct translation of Ephesians 2:15b, ton nomon tōn entolōn en dogmasin, especially per the context of the dogmas of the dividing wall, would be: “the religious Law of commandments in dogmas.”t Nomos is rendered as “law,” but clarified with an italic “religious,” as it would be more akin to man-made religious law than Biblical law, definitions afforded by the classical meaning of nomos and varied usage throughout the Pauline Epistles where it does not need to mean the Mosaic Torah.u This law would be more akin to what is described in the opening words of Mishnah tractate Pirkei Avot: “make a fence around the Torah”v (m.Avot 1:1).w

    “The religious Law of commandments in dogmas” of Ephesians 2:15b is the cause of the enmity between Jew and non-Jew witnessed in Paul’s day. It is not the cause of enmity or hostility because God’s Torah demands that His people be holy unto Him and separated from paganism, valuing human life and following a righteous code of conduct. This man-made law set forth in religious decrees causes enmity because it deliberately skews the work of God as originally laid forth in the Torah mandate for Israel to be a blessing to all! In the First Century, it would primarily include things like proselytic circumcision (cf. Ephesians 2:11), something not required by the Torah as an entryway into God’s covenant people, yet often set ahead of belief or faith in God and certainly required by the establishment of the time. Paul spoke against non-Jewish Believers going through such a ritual circumcision, because it would devalue one’s own native culture and the unique things that it could bring to the Kingdom of God (Galatians 3:28).x

    There are, in fact, several kinds of Rabbinical injunctions making up Jewish religious law that would have placed a kind of dividing wall between the Jewish people and the nations, which would have undoubtedly caused problems for the mission upon which Paul had embarked among the nations. Examples of this are replete in the Gospels, where Yeshua directly confronted many of the halachic practices in His day, that directly interfered with the work of His Father. While Yeshua instructed His Disciples to follow the lead of the Pharisees (Matthew 23:1-2), there were clearly matters where they were hypocritical and were not to be followed (Matthew 23:3). In Yeshua’s Sermon on the Mount (Matthew chs. 5-7), our Lord uses the statement “You have heard that it was said” (Matthew 5:27, 38, 43), and proceeds not to deny the continuance of the Mosaic Torah, but correct (gross) misunderstandings of it.y One of the most significant areas where Yeshua’s teaching directly confronted the understanding of His day appears in Matthew 5:43-44:

    “You have heard that it was said, ‘YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR [Leviticus 19:18] and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”

    It is absolutely imperative to keep in mind that nowhere in the Tanach can any reference be found to “hate your enemy.” Kaiser asserts, “For some years now, I have offered my students a monetary prize if anyone can find the second part of that quote anywhere in the Old Testament. So far no one has claimed the prize.”z Stern also remarks on Matthew 5:43, “nowhere does the Tanakh teach that you should hate your enemy.”aa Those in the Qumran community, however, specifically commanded love only for the members of one’s covenant community and that hatred could be shown for the outsider:

    “He is to teach them both to love all the Children of Light—each commensurate with his rightful place in the council of God—and to hate all the Children of Darkness, each commensurate with his guilt and the vengeance due him from God” (1QS 1.9-11).bb

    The kind of dogma which would demand that one hate others outside of the accepted community of Israel was one which undeniably had to be abolished via the work of Yeshua, as our Lord emphasized love for all people as the first of the commandments (Matthew 22:36-40; Mark 12:28-34; Luke 10:25-28; cf. Deuteronomy 6:5; Leviticus 19:18). While it can be demonstrated that both Yeshua and Paul (cf. Acts 25:8) kept many of the extra-Biblical traditions of their day— they certainly clashed in the area of equality for all. (In fact, such equality put the gospel at odds with the Greco-Roman establishment every bit as much as with the Jewish establishment!) Hating other human beings, even sinners outside of the Jewish community, would have come into direct conflict with the Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8). Any kind of extra- Biblical decree that would give justification, for hating other people, was to be jettisoned via the teachings and sacrificial work of Yeshua.

    If we understand the fact that the Temple was to be a testimony to the God of Israel among the nations (1 Kings 8:41-43)—and indeed a house of prayer for all nations (Isaiah 56:6-7)— then the placement of a physical barrier prohibiting the nations from entering into the inner sanctuary was obviously something that He had never intended! Such a barrier, at least in the hearts and minds of the First Century Jewish Believers, had to have been removed by the work of Yeshua within them. This was something that was justified by much of “the religious Law of commandments in dogmas” within Second Temple Judaism, but was something that ran quite contrary to the missional intention of Moses’ Teaching—with Israel being a blessing to all nations!cc

    To a strong degree, the barrier wall in the Second Temple was a manifestation of Jewish hatred for the nations—not at all a manifestation of love and of spiritual concern. By His sacrifice, Yeshua tore down this wall and with it whatever human regulations placed unnecessary barriers between people and the Father. In so doing, Yeshua would be able to bring Jewish people and those from the nations together as kainon anthrōpon (kaino.n a;nqrwpon)dd or “one new humanity” (Ephesians 2:15c, NRSV/CJB/TNIV) in Him.

    It is only at the foot of Yeshua’s cross where redemption for all people can be found, and reconciliation between all people can be enacted (Ephesians 2:16). Paul asserts, “For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit” (Ephesians 2:18), as the true unity that God desires among the redeemed can only be found in the work of His Son. A significant effect of this, which Paul explains to the non-Jewish Believers of Asia Minor, is “you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizensee with God’s people and members of God’s household” (Ephesians 2:19). They are a part of the community of Israel, as a direct result of their faith in Israel’s Messiah. The assembly that the Messiah has established has been built up by the faithful work of both apostles and prophets, made to be like the Jerusalem Temple—but one composed of people filled with the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 2:20-22).

    Yeshua the Messiah never came and eliminated the Torah, as per His crucial admonition in Matthew 5:17-19. Rather, the wall that He broke down was that of Rabbinical addition and/or manipulation to the commandments that had separated the non-Jews coming to faith from inclusion in Israel. It was never the Torah or Pentateuch itself that caused a wall of division to be erected not permitting the outsider from becoming a part of the Commonwealth of Israel. Certain Rabbinical ordinances or dogmas not found in the Torah ultimately led to a barrier wall being constructed on the Temple Mount, and caused this separation to take place.ff

    Endnotes:

    a Be aware of how “in Ephesus” (en Ephesō) does not appear in the oldest manuscripts of Ephesians 1:1 (cf. Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament [London and New York: United Bible Societies, 1975], 601), and that in all likelihood the Epistle of Ephesians was originally a circular letter written by the Apostle Paul to assemblies within Asia Minor, eventually making its way to Ephesus. The RSV notably rendered Ephesians 1:1 with: “Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, to the saints who are also faithful in Christ Jesus.”

    For a further discussion, consult C.E. Arnold, “Ephesians, Letter to the: Destination,” in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, pp 243-245, and the author’s entry for the Epistle of Ephesians in A Survey of the Apostolic Scriptures for the Practical Messianic.

    b While the Apostolic Scriptures employ eirēnē for “peace,” this classical term largely only concerns an absence of war. Eirēnē notably translates shalom in the Septuagint, and as such would include total harmony between God, humankind, and ultimately all of Creation. This is a peace that includes “unimpaired relationships with others and fulfillment in one’s undertakings” (G. Lloyd Carr, “shālôm,” in TWOT, 1:931).

    c Christopher J.H. Wright, The Mission of God: Unlocking the Bible’s Grand Narrative (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2006), 313.

    d Derek Tidball, The Message of the Cross (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2001), 228.

    e Kaiser, Toward Old Testament Ethics, 310.

    f The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged, 425.

    g Ibid., 706.

    h S. Westerholm, “Temple,” in ISBE, 4:772; cf. Alfred Edersheim, The Temple: Its Ministry and Services (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994), pp 22-24.

    i Francis Foulkes, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: The Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians (London: Tyndale Press, 1963), 82.

    j Bruce, Colossians-Philemon-Ephesians, pp 297-298; cf. Ephesians 6:20 where Paul says he is “an ambassador in N.T. Wright further states, “The image of the dividing wall is, pretty certainly, taken from the Jerusalem temple, with its sign warning Gentiles to come no further” (Justification, 172).

    k Cf. D.G. Reid, “Triumph,” in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, 951.

    l Cf. Mark 11:17; Mathew 21:13; Luke 19:46.

    m The NLT has the highly paraphrased, and also quite problematic: “By his death he ended the whole system of Jewish law that excluded the Gentiles.”

    n Ben Witherington III, The Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on the Captivity Epistles (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 251.

    o BDAG, 340.

    p G. Schrenk, “to command, commission,” in TDNT, 235.

    q BDAG, 254.

    r Ibid.

    s Wayne E. Ward, “dogma,” in Baker’s Dictionary of Theology, 171.

    t The 1993 German Elberfelder Bibel has “das Gesetz der Gebote in Satzungen.” The singular term Satzung can notably mean “regulations, statutes and articles of a club” (Langenscheidts New College German Dictionary, 516).

    u Worthwhile to consider here is “nomos,” in Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period, 457, which indicates,

    “Although nomos overlaps torah and the English word ‘law’ in meaning, it also has other connotations. An important additional concept was the idea of ‘custom’ in a particular sense: the Greeks often considered their customs to be ‘natural law.’ Thus, obedience to the law meant more than honoring certain written regulations; it included an entire way of life. In Jewish writings in Greek, the term ‘the law’ (to nomos) came to mean ‘Jewish religion.’”

    v Heb. ha’r’beih v’asu seyag l’Torah.

    w Kravitz and Olitzky, 1.

    x Consult the Excursus “Should Non-Jewish Messianic Believers ‘Convert’ to (Messianic) Judaism?” in the author’s commentary Galatians for the Practical Messianic.

    y Kaiser, The Promise-Plan of God, 313 explains, “Jesus was correcting the oral traditions that had accumulated

    around the law (‘You have heard it said’). He did not say, as all too many presume, something like ‘It is written, but I now correct that by saying…’”

    z Ibid.

    aa Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary, 30.

    bb Michael Wise, Martin Abegg, Jr., and Edward Cook, trans., The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation (San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1996), 127.

    cc Hegg’s thoughts are well taken:

    “[W]e may conclude that Yeshua abolished those Rabbinic laws which, when practiced, set aside the Law of God by separating Jew and Gentile which God intended to make one in Mashiach. This was the ‘dividing wall, the (Rabbinic) law contained in the ordinances (of the oral Torah)’. Those parts of the oral Torah which affirm the written Torah or are in harmony with it remain viable for the Messianic believer as the traditions of the fathers” (Tim Hegg. [1996].   The “DividingWall” in Ephesians 2:14Torah Resource.)

    Daniel C. Juster, Jewish Roots (Shippensburg, PA: Destiny Image, 1995), 113 offers a similar view:

    “The commands and ordinances are not necessarily intrinsically Torah, but the oral extensions of these laws made Gentiles unclean and contact with Gentiles something to avoid. As well, it would abolish commands precluding a Jew worshipping in the most intimate way with a Gentile since the Gentile, in Yeshua, is no longer an idolatrous sinner.”

    See also the observations of Daniel C. Juster, Jewish Roots (Shippensburg, PA: Destiny Image, 1995), 113.

    dd Note how the term anēr (avnh,r) or “male” is not employed here, but the more general term for humankind. An inclusive language rendering here is to be preferred.

    ee Grk. ouketi este xenoi kai paroikoi alla este sumpolitai.

    ff For a further discussion of these and the relevant surrounding passages, consult the author’s article “The Message of Ephesians” and his commentary Ephesians for the Practical Messianic.

     

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-2gbqcr’]

     

    Original article provided in its entirety from http://tnnonline.net/faq/E/Ephesians_2_14-15.pdf

  • The ‘Wall of Separation’ in Ephesians 2:14

    The ‘Wall of Separation’ in Ephesians 2:14

    The unity Paul speaks of is inclusive (“How do we include everybody?”), not exclusive (“What people do we need to kick out?”). In Ephesians 2, what was the “law of commandment” and the “wall of separation”, and what was abolished by Jesus? How to work toward unity today. Roles of the leaders toward unity. Unity by coercion will not last; authoritarianism divides and is contrary to the Ephesian instruction. Every joint has its role – no exclusiveness.

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-4modk9′]

    (Download Sermon)

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-2to20p’]

    Original article provided in its entirety from www.borntowin.net

  • The ‘Dividing Wall’ in Ephesians 2:14

    The ‘Dividing Wall’ in Ephesians 2:14

    Many commentators interpret Eph. 2:14 (the “dividing wall” passage) as teaching that some (all?) of God’s commandments in the Law (Torah) have been done away with, so that Jew and gentile could be “one new man” in Yeshua. But is this really what’s being said?

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-dnz36′]

    (Download PDF)

    [av_hr class=’custom’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’100%’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’5px’ custom_margin_bottom=’5px’ icon_select=’no’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ av_uid=’av-21qeb6′]

    Original article provided it its entirety by Messianic Publications