YAHWEH'S LAW APPLIES TODAY
When people begin to love their Creator, they want to know
what will please Him. The teaching of most Christian churches is that "God
wants only your faith and adoration." How tragic it is that they ignore the
many scriptures that tell us the truth! Our Father Yahweh has given a detailed
set of instructions to His children. These instructions are called the Law of
Yahweh or in Hebrew the Torah. Not only does it please Him when we follow this
law, but Yahshua the Messiah explained that we cannot gain eternal life if we
reject it (Matthew 19:17).
This article will explain the most popular scriptures that
are erroneously used to support the no-law doctrine. With a little research and
common sense we can sort out all the problems.
By Elder Dave Ganton
cursory reading of many scriptures seems to imply
that the law was done away. Do these scriptures all add up to the ultimate
conclusion that the law is truly cancelled? Could this vast majority of
religions be mistaken? Could the numerous scholars who have studied this subject
and arrived at this conclusion be in error? Isn't it probable that the majority
is right and the minority is wrong? Let's turn to Revelation 12:9 to find the answer to this question: "And the
great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth
the whole world: he was cast out
into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him," According to this
scripture, the whole world has been deceived by Satan. This is the majority.
Could this include the scholars and highly trained teachers?
TRUTH
HIDDEN FROM THE WISE
The answer to this question is also in Yahweh's word, Matt.11:25 Yahshua says the deeper truths of Yahweh's word have been
hidden from the wise and scholarly and have been revealed to babes. The word
babe in Greek is nepios meaning unlearned, simple thinking people. Yahweh said that He
would confound the scholarly and those who propose to be great He tells us that
the majority (including the scholarly) are deceived; they are mistaken.
"But Elohim hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the
wise; and Elohim hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things
which are mighty," 1
Corinthians 1:27.
Keep this in mind during this study, you don't need to be a scholar or
highly learned to understand the deep things of Yahweh. His truth has always
been believed by the simple minority, which has been right, while the majority
was wrong. To cite a few examples: Noah, who Yahweh said was righteous,
Gen.7:1, was the minority but he and his
family were right and the rest of the world was wrong and were destroyed on
account of it. Lot was the only
righteous one in two whole cities. Remember Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Eliyah,
Elisha, the prophets and many, many others who were the minority in their time.
Let us not neglect to mention Yahshua, Who was the only right one in the
whole world. His apostles who He taught were the minority. Yes, the majority can
be mistaken. They can be deceived. With this in mind let us begin by
understanding how the unlearned, simple thinking person can understand while the
wise and scholarly cannot.
1
Cor. 2:1-16 answers
the question to its fullest. The deep things of Yahweh are spiritually
discerned. They don't come by the wisdom of man but are given us through the
Spirit of Yahweh. The Holy Spirit will lead us into all the truth if we are
receptive, John 16:13. Through the Holy Spirit we have access to the mind of the Messiah and
His Father. 1 Cor. 2:16
Let us now allow Yahweh's Spirit to work in us as we begin to study
deeper into the subject of the Law. It is commonly referred to as the law of
Moses. This implies that the law originated with Moses. Let's clarify just where
the law came from: "And
it shall be for a sign unto thee upon thine hand, and for a memorial between
thine eyes, that Yahweh's law may be in thy mouth: for with a strong hand hath
Yahweh brought thee out of Egypt,"
Exodus 13:9. "Then said Yahweh unto
Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go
out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they
will walk in my law, or no,"
Exodus 16:4.
THE
LAW IN GENESIS
These and many other scriptures confirm that it is Yahweh's law. It
originated and came from Him. No one will argue that point as it is
self-evident. The setting of this groundwork is to show that these same laws
that were given at the time of Moses were in force and known to the patriarchs
and others even in pre-flood times and did not originate at the time of Moses. A
careful study of the book of Genesis will reveal this truth.
A few of the more prominent scriptures on this topic start with Cain and
Abel in Genesis, chapter four. Two things of note occur in this chapter. First,
Cain and Abel both brought offerings to present to Yahweh. Abel's was accepted
while Cain’s was rejected. Cain was crestfallen over his rejection. He was
angry. Yahweh asked him why he was angry, then declared Cain would be accepted
if he did right. If he did not do right, sin was crouching at the door.
1
John 3:4 states,
sin is the transgression of the law. Yahweh told Cain he did wrong. If he did
wrong, there of necessity had to be a law defining what was right in that
situation. The presence of sin necessitates a law must have been broken, else it
would not be a transgression. If Cain had not transgressed a law concerning
offerings and what was acceptable, his offering would have been accepted. Yahweh
expected him to know what was right and what was wrong. Knowing this, his
offering was rejected.
Following this, Cain was furious. He tricked Abel into travelling into
the wilderness where he killed him and buried his body. Cain knew this was wrong
and he was punished because he knowingly killed his brother. For there to be a
penalty there had to be a transgression or breaking of the law. Paul said that
where there is no law there is no transgression. It follows that if there is no
law there can be no sin and no penalty, Rom.4:15. Did Cain know of a commandment that said, thou shalt not kill?
It is obvious that he did.
Let's go forward to another prominent case before the time of Moses where
it is evident that the Ten Commandments were known to Joseph, Gen.
39:6-10. Joseph, after being sold as a
slave into Egypt found favour with Potiphar, a captain of Pharaohs guard and was
given charge over all Potiphar’s possessions. Potiphar's wife desired to lay
with Joseph, but he resisted her advances, saying he could not do such a
terrible thing and sin against Elohim, verse
9.
How did Joseph know it would be a sin to lay
with her? He was very familiar with the Commandment, thou shalt not commit
adultery evidently taught by his forefathers. It was said of Abraham by Yahweh Gen.26:5,
Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments,
my statutes
and my laws. It
was not just the Ten Commandments that were known to the pre-flood followers of
Yahweh. Noah knew about clean and unclean foods, Gen.7:1-5. Tithing was also known and practised long before Moses, Gen.14:20; 28:22.
LAW
ADDED DUE TO TRANSGRESSIONS
There are many more scriptures to verify that the law as given by the Ten
Commandments was known and obeyed before it was given to Moses at Mt.Sinai. But
these will suffice for the purpose of this study. To come to a correct
understanding as to whether the law has been done away, we first need to know
what the law is and what it does and how Yahweh uses it. Let's go backward in
time to Paul’s day and examine a scripture that most think says that the law
was given as a punishment for sin committed by the Israelites. This question
arises from time to time on the meaning of Gal.3:19: Why
then the law? It was added because of transgressions
Is it really correct to say the law was added as punishment ? Yahweh gave
Moses the law to give to the Israelites. Can you think of a good reason why a
written code of laws was necessary at that time? Let's go back to the very
beginning of mankind to find the answer. Yahweh instructed Adam fully when he
was created. Paul said sin entered the world through Adam, Rom. 5:12 (more on this scripture later.) Since sin is the transgression
of the law (1 John 3:4) then Adam was fully instructed
in the law of Yahweh. This law was handed down from father to son for many
generations (as yet not a written code of ethics). Circumstances led Jacob
(Israel) and his family to take up residence in Egypt.
Because of Joseph they found favour in the eyes of the Pharaoh. In due
time a new Pharaoh came to power who did not know Joseph and was not disposed to
be kind to the Israelites. They were forced into slavery where they remained for
430 years; they were not allowed to keep Sabbath, make offerings etc., to their
Elohim. They gradually lost sight of who and what they were. They forgot
Yahweh's laws, statutes, and commands, which their forefather Abraham had kept
and handed down to his sons. Moses questioned who it was He was talking to at
the burning bush, Exodus 3:16. The Israelites would demand proof of whom Moses was speaking for they
had lost contact with and had little memory of the Elohim of their fathers,
being residents of pagan Egypt over 400 years.
They were ecstatic to leave Egypt and finally be free. However, the joy
soon turned to complaining as they encountered numerous problems and did not
know the power and loyalty of Yahweh. This attitude continued throughout the
journey to Mount Sinai. When Moses went up to Sinai to receive Yahweh's
instructions for the Israelites, he was gone forty days. They were so accustomed
to the false deities of Egypt that they told Aaron to make them a deity,
something they could see, something they could look at. Aaron complied,
Ex. 32:1-6.
Take special note of this: they did not realise they were sinning. This
was the deity which brought them out of Egypt as far as they were concerned,
verse 4. They were following the practices of Egypt where they had been for 430
years. That is why they were given the law, to identify sin for them, Gal.
3:19, not for punishment as some
think, but to identify sin for the Israelites. The law was now written in stone
to identify clearly what Yahweh's principles are. The law was etched in stone
for Israel because of their sins, their transgressions.
This has not changed. The law still identifies sin, Rom.3:20, last part. Paul says, through the law comes the knowledge of
sin. He says, also, (Rom.7:12) he didn't know he was coveting until the law
identified it for him. He sees the law as a Holy thing and the Commandment is
Holy, just and good, verse
12. He agreed totally with Moses on
this subject, Deut. 4:5-8. He saw the law as bringing wisdom to the Israelites. He saw the
righteous concepts that the law teaches, verse 8.
Remember, the Israelites had been without law and any moral principles
for hundreds of years while in Egypt. Yahweh could not in good conscience hold
them responsible for their actions in this situation. Paul understood the
concept, where there is no law there is no transgression Rom. 4:15. Yet he said in Romans
5:13: sin was in the world before the
law was given referring to the written code given to Moses at Mount Sinai.
Yahweh in His goodness and fairness could not impute a penalty without first
outlining the transgression which He did through publishing and codifying the
law.
PURPOSE
OF THE LAW
Therein lies the purpose of the law. It instructs. It tells us the
difference between right and wrong. The law does not make us righteous. It does
not give us salvation. It guides. Let me qualify these statements. The law does
not make us righteous. It has no power to do that. It instructs us in righteous
behaviour. It does not give us salvation. It is a mirror, rule and guide. It
monitors our behaviour. It establishes rules to live by. It instructs us in the
righteous behaviour that leads to the salvation process. That is what the law
does. It instructs. That is what it did for the Israelites and that is what it
does for us. Let us proceed with the law in force and Yahshua not yet in the
picture. The law defines sin. Sin is the transgression of the law, 1
John 3:4.The
wages of sin is death. Rom. 6:23, first part. Therein lies the curse of the law, Gal. 3:13.
DEATH
IS A CURSE
Death is a permanent condition that lasts for all eternity. There is no
provision in the law for a resurrection. There is no provision in the law for
eternal life. There are just temporal rewards pertaining to this life for
obedience and a death sentence for disobedience, death-eternal. If we obey the
law it is powerless in regard to us in that we are not under the penalty of
death. We empower the law when we disobey. When we sin we give the law power
over us, and it can now demand a
penalty to be paid. That penalty (wages of sin) is our death, Rom. 6:23. This is eternal death from which there is no escape.
Remember, there is no provision in the law for a resurrection. If we have
sinned but once, the death penalty stands against us. There is no provision in
the law for our forgiveness. From that point on, if we obey the law to
perfection the death penalty for that one infraction still stands against us. It
must be paid before we are right with Yahweh. It requires us to be dead forever.
That is the state we are in with the law and without Yahshua.
Dead for all eternity. What would we gain by paying the penalty for our
own sins? We are dead forever and still separated from Yahweh. What would Yahweh
gain from this? Nothing. Just billions of eternally dead people whose whole
existence was pointless from both positions. Question: can the law make us
righteous? Answer: no, it can only instruct us and demand a penalty if we fail
to heed its instructions. Can you see how pointless it would be for us to pay
the penalty for our sins? We would be dead for all eternity with no hope of
living again.
Therein lies the curse of the law that Paul speaks about in Gal. 3:13: the death penalty that hangs over everyone. He said in Col. 2:13 that we were dead in our trespasses. Paul fully understood the condition of mankind without Messiah. In Col. 2:14 he talks about a cheirographon or legal bond which stands against us. This scripture has been translated in various ways: King James: handwriting of ordinances, New International: having cancelled the written code with its regulations, Revised Standard: having cancelled the bond which stood against us. All these phrases are translated from a single Greek word, cheirographon. It means a legal bond of indebtedness This cheirographon stood against us. This legal bond of indebtedness was the penalty that the law demanded to be paid, the death penalty for our sins. Yahweh held this bond that was against us. We could not pay this debt ourselves. We have already seen the futility in that.
Enter Messiah Yahshua! He became cursed on our behalf Gal. 3:13. He paid the cheirographon or Bond that was against us and set
us free from the law’s curse. This cheirographon was marked paid and
(symbolically) nailed to the tree with Messiah. Col. 2:14. Messiah
accomplished what we on our own could not do. We are now justified before
Yahweh. Rom. 5:9-10. We are reconciled to the Heavenly Father.
Take
special note: This is not a completed
salvation process! This is the beginning of the salvation process only! Give
attention to the last part of verses
9 and 10. It says that now being justified
or reconciled by the death of His Son we shall be saved by His life, 1 Cor. 15:17.
If
Messiah has not been raised your faith is futile and you are still in your sins
wrote the Apostle Paul. We are reconciled to the Father by the Death of Yahshua
but we are saved by His life. Paul understood this and explains how this can be
in Gal. 2-20. it is no longer I who live but Messiah lives in me. It is the
resurrection and life of Yahshua that will save us. The salvation process began
at the torture stake and the Savior continues that process in us throughout our
lives. Now that Yahshua has paid the penalty the law demanded which began the
salvation process in us, the law is
still required to show us what is right in Yahweh’s eyes. Those who love
Yahweh still want to do His will after they are converted and baptized.
FORGIVENESS
FOR BREAKING THE LAW
Yahshua saw that the law was an instructor. He saw that it identified sin
for us. He saw that it was powerless if we obeyed it. We give it power over us
if we disobey its instructions. We give it the power to demand our death. Is
this still the case? Can we still come under the curse of the law?
To begin to understand our current relationship with the law let's use an
example from our era. When Queen Elizabeth was coronated she granted pardons to
many criminals. Some were convicted murderers with life sentences. They did not
pay the penalty for their crimes. The Queen forgave them and set them free. They
were under her grace.
Did she cancel the law that convicted them? No, she cancelled the
penalty. Could the law possibly convict them again? Could they fall from the
Queen’s grace?
Were they now free to
do whatever they desired with no further consequences? Could the law no longer
touch them? They remain under the Queen’s grace as long as they obey the law.
If they break the law, they fall from the Queen’s grace and can once again be
convicted by the law. The law still identifies criminal activities just as it
did before the Queen was coronated. She cancelled the penalty not the
law.
It is no different today with Yahweh's laws. Yahweh granted us pardon
through the death of His Son Who paid the penalty in our place. The law remains
as it was before. It is still an instructor and identifies sin. We are under
Yahweh's grace. We remain in this state as long as we obey the law. Yahweh's
plan is superior to the Queen’s plan.
Yahweh has inserted a forgiveness clause in the new covenant. He will
reapply Yahshua's blood as atonement for our sin if we do transgress the law.
1 John 1:9 also 1 John 2:1-2. If we do sin, transgress the law (1John 3:4), He is faithful and just and will forgive our sins. When sin
exists, it needs to be forgiven and the law must also exist to identify it.
LAW
DONE AWAY - NO SIN
As was stated in the beginning of this study, the general erroneous
teaching of those religions professing Christianity is the law was done away and
nailed to the stake. Let's take this concept to its ultimate conclusion. Assume
for a moment that this is true, that the law is done away. 1
John 3:4 says sin
is the transgression of the law. If, then, there is no law there can be no sin.
Then there can be no penalty. Paul said, where there is no law there is no
transgression, Rom. 4:15; 5:13.
Where does that leave us in relation to Yahshua and His sacrifice? If
there is no law, then sin was cancelled at the stake. Since sin is the
transgression of the law and it was cancelled, then every one born after that
time has not sinned and has incurred no penalty needing forgiveness because
there is no law.
Therefore, Yahshua did not die for your sins or mine as we haven't
committed any, as we were born after He died and got rid of the law, and to this
day we have not sinned, according to the “no law teachers.” That is the
ultimate conclusion to the law done away concept. In that case we are not under
grace because it is not necessary. There can be no other conclusion. How does
this concept square with scripture? 1 John 1:8 says, if we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves and the
truth is not in us. John wrote this statement some 50 to 65 years after the
death of Yahshua. He also said sin was still in the world, (1 John 1:10) if we say we have not sinned we make Him a liar
and the truth is not in us. So what are we saying by the law done away
statement? We are calling Yahshua a liar and the truth is not in us. Read the
scripture again. That is what it
says!!!
What about the many scriptures that are quoted that seem to say the law
was done away? Most of these scriptures are in the writings of Paul. The first
thing we need to know is Paul’s attitude toward the law. A good place to start
is with Paul’s own words in Acts 24:14: but this I admit to you, that according to The Way, which they call a sect, so I worship the ELOHIM of our fathers, believing
everything laid down by the law or written in the prophets.
If you read the preceding chapter you will find that Paul was being
accused by the Jews of preaching against the law, Acts 23:29. Isn't that what people say, even today, that Paul teaches against the
law? Read again his response to this charge in Acts 24:14. In Acts 25:8. Paul says, neither against the law of the Jews nor against the temple
nor against Caesar have I offended at all. Paul was innocent of the charges
brought against him at that time and is still innocent of the same charge that
is brought against him today by most of the Christian professing world. Paul
taught the law is Holy and the Commandments are Holy, just and good. Rom. 7:12.
We have seen previously that Paul recognised that the law identifies sin.
Rom. 3:20. Remember, Yahshua had died and
was resurrected many years before Paul wrote this. But Paul said the law still
identifies sin. It is still doing what it had done since creation, defining what
sin is. It still instructs.
Notice especially that Peter warns us to be careful of Paul’s writings:
"As also in all his [Paul’s] epistles, speaking in them of these things;
in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned
and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own
destruction," 2 Peter 3:15-16 AV.
YAHSHUA'S
WORDS
Let's go now to the person who was supposedly the head of the Jerusalem
assembly of believers. He is writing to the twelve tribes in the dispersion. In James
2:8-12, he discusses the royal law. you
shall love your neighbour as yourself. That is the second part of the royal law.
Let's turn to Matt. 22:35-40 to find the complete royal law. You shall love Yahweh your
ELOHIM with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind verse 38. This is
the first and great Commandment and the second is like it: you shall love your
neighbour as yourself verse
40. On these two Commandments hang
the law and the prophets. The first four of the Ten Commandments tell us how to
love Yahweh and the last six tell us how to love our neighbour.
In James
2:8-12, we read in verse 10: if you
break one point of the law you become guilty of it all. He adds that the one who
said do not commit adultery also said thou shalt not kill. Can you see how the
royal law we are to live by encapsulates each of the Ten Commandments? They are
the full embodiment of Yahweh's law. James wrote many years after the death and
resurrection of Yahshua. Even so, James is still talking about the law as being
binding.
Let's go now to the Head of the assembly, Yahshua, [Eph. 5:23] and see what He has to say about the notion that the law was
done away. It should be the only scripture needed to settle the subject. His
words are clear and concise. However, in spite of the clarity, a garbled
understanding has been wrung from it. That Scripture is Matt. 5:17: “Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets, I
have come not to abolish but to fulfil them.” Through His Son Yahshua we have
the Supreme ruler of the universe telling us not to think something.
PERVERTED
UNDERSTANDING
Yet, in spite of that warning, that is exactly what the Christian
thinking is today. Yahshua fulfilled the law so we don't have to! The word
fulfil is understood in this way: I
have fulfilled my duty so the duty no longer exists. It is understood in the
sense of bringing something to an end. This is not the meaning it had in the old
English of the 1611 translation of the King James Bible. At that time it meant
to make replete or to cram to the fullest. In other words, to fill full. Fill to
the brim.
This is an example of the way word meanings change over the centuries.
Another example of this is 1 Thes. 4:15: for this I say unto you by the word of the Master, that we who
are alive and remain unto the coming of the Master shall not prevent them which
are asleep Notice the word PREVENT. In the King James Translation of the Bible
it means to precede or go before. The word does not have that meaning in
today’s English. It means to stop something from happening or to stop someone
from doing something. It is the same with the word fulfil.
MAGNIFIED
THE LAW
Returning to Matt. 5:17, let us understand exactly what Yahshua said and meant by His statement.
We must turn to the Greek language from which the King James was translated. The
Greek word for abolish is “kataluo” It means to loosen down, to destroy,
demolish. The Greek for fulfil is “pleroo” It means to cram full, to make
replete, to level up. Yahshua said He didn't come to kataluo (to destroy) but to
pleroo (build up or magnify) the law. He came to expand the law to encompass its
fullest spiritual meaning. Isn't that just what He went on to do in verses 18 to 48? He took the law
from thou shalt not do, to the spiritual thou shalt not WANT to do. Was it not
to show that sin begins in the mind and heart? Yahshua magnified the law and
made it honourable, Isaiah 42:21. Since Yahshua went on to expand the law to its fullest, should
we honestly think that it was done away under the new Covenant? Was He not
preparing the way for writing the law in the hearts and minds of His people? Heb. 8:8-10 quoted from
Jer. 31:31-34. Something to note here is that
the major difference in the old and the new covenant is where and how it is
written. The old covenant was written on tables of stone by the finger of Yahweh
and presented to Moses in person. The New Covenant is written in the hearts and
minds of Yahweh's people by the Holy Spirit. One was a hand-to-hand
presentation. The other was a mind-to-mind transfer from Yahweh's mind to ours
through the Holy Spirit. Compare Ex.
31:18 and Jer.
31:31-34 and also Heb. 8:8-18 and Heb. 10:16-17.
The Old Covenant was obeyed from compulsion. The new covenant is obeyed
from the desire to be close to and to please Yahweh and Yahshua. There are many
other scriptures that are used in an attempt to prove that the law was done
away. This is done mainly by changing the subject of a statement to something it
is not. An example of this mindset is the attempt to do away with the Sabbath by
using Rom. 14 and
also Col. 2:16-17.
THE
SABBATH QUESTION
First, let's examine Rom.14.
The attempt is made to make the
Sabbath the subject of this chapter when it is not. The subject of this chapter
is judgment of those who are new to or weaker in the faith. The subject is set
forth in verse 4. Those who were stronger in the faith and understood the deeper
meanings of Yahweh's word were passing judgment by their actions and words on
their fellow brethren. Some felt that it was okay to eat meat while those weaker
in knowledge felt that they should eat only vegetables. Why would they think
this? Why was it not right to eat meat?
To find the answer we must understand the pagan culture surrounding them.
There were false gods by the hundreds. Every animal that was killed for food was
routinely sacrificed to one of these false gods. The meat was then often sold in
the meat markets. Some believed that it was wrong to eat meat that was
sacrificed to idols. Those stronger in the faith understood that an idol is
really nothing, just a figment of someone’s imagination, 1
Cor. 8:4. As
Paul said in verse 7 through 10, take care lest this knowledge causes a weaker brother to
stumble as referred to in Romans
14.
Suffice it to say that the Sabbath was not the
subject being discussed by Paul, for it is nowhere mentioned in this entire
chapter. This is confirmed by verses 5 & 6. He is talking about the observance of a day for fasting,
whether to eat or abstain from eating on it. Both were done in honour of
Yahshua, so don't pass judgment on one another over such a trivial matter. Verse 10.
Turning to Col. 2:1-7 let us
first note that it is not the Jews who are judging or condemning the brethren
concerning the matters of food and drink, festivals, new moons and Sabbaths. The
erroneous belief is that the Jews were telling the followers of Yahshua that
they should be observing these things and Paul is telling them that it is not
necessary, as they are only a shadow of things to come. Is this really the case?
We will see very clearly that this is not the case at all.
Col. 2:8 clearly sets the stage in stating, see to it that no one makes
a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceit according to human
tradition The Sabbath, new moons and festivals are not meant here, for they are
not from human tradition but from Yahweh's clear commands. Verse 18 will
further prove that the Jews were not the instigators here. “Let no one
disqualify you insisting on self abasement and the worship of angels.” These
are not Jewish beliefs or teachings. You will not find them either in scripture
or in Jewish tradition. Verses 20-22 will verify that it is the pagan culture around them that is
causing the trouble. Verse
21: "Do not handle. Do not
taste. Do not touch. This is alleged to be referring to the clean and unclean
foods mentioned in the books of the law, but is in error as verse 22 will
verify. The reference is according to human precepts and doctrines from the mind of man not
Yahweh.
BODY
OF MESSIAH TO JUDGE
Let's now begin to understand what Paul is talking about in Col.2:16-17. Who is doing the judging and why? We have already established
that it is the pagan culture around the brethren at Colosse who are being
judgmental. For what reason? Let's come forward to the same situation that still
exists today. Nothing has changed. As Ecclesiastes 1:9 wisely
states: There is nothing new under the sun. A great many religions of this age
wrongfully insist Yahshua is just one of many ways to salvation when scripture
specifically says that Yahshua is the only way to salvation. (Acts 4:12
And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under
heaven given among men by which we must be saved.) He is only one of many
mediators between the Almighty and man. Are you shocked that this would be said?
There are many saints who supposedly intervene on our behalf with Yahweh.
Angels are revered in many religions as having a part to play in our spiritual
relationship with Yahweh. Penance and afflicting the body as in the days of Lent
are said to enhance our standing with Yahweh. It is said that the Sabbath has
been replaced with the Lord's day,
Sunday. Yahweh's Holy days have been replaced by days of pagan origin. Has
anything changed since Paul wrote to the Colossians?
What is said about those who believe that the law of Yahweh is still to
be obeyed, including the Sabbath and Holy Days? Are we judged as doing wrong by
those around us? The answer is evident every day.
This letter to the Colossians was written by Paul toward the end of his
life some 60
[30?] years
after the death of Yahshua and His resurrection. It is obvious that the culture
around them was not observing the things mentioned in verse 16. Since Paul
mentioned these things, it should be just as obvious that the Colossian brethren
were observing them. Paul called these things a shadow or preview of things to
come. He did not say a shadow of things that have come but a shadow of things
yet to come, so he sees them as important. Col.
2:16-17 has been so butchered that it is
not even recognisable when compared to the original statement of Paul.
From the literal Greek to English translation, it reads: therefore, Let
no one judge you in eating and in drinking or in respect of a feast or of a new
moon or of Sabbaths which are a shadow of things coming but the body of Messiah.
Paul is simply saying let there be no judge but the body of Messiah. About what?
Eating, drinking, new moon celebrations, festivals and Sabbaths. Why are these
things important to followers of Yahweh? Because they preview things that are to
come in the accomplishment of His plan. Those who study and know their Bible
will comprehend the importance of clean food, improper imbibing, special Holy
Days and Sabbaths.
PAUL
WAS MISUNDERSTOOD
Paul said that all these other things being foisted on the Colossians by
the Gnostics and Hellenists had the appearance of piety or holiness but were of
no real value since they were from man and not from Yahweh. It is very difficult
in a study such as this to expound to the fullest all of the scriptures that
have been misrepresented as doing away with the law. It would take a large
volume of books to do this. The purpose of this study is to begin to see the law
from a positive viewpoint rather than a negative one. If a scripture is
misrepresented then the true message is missed and one fails to understand what
the Messiah and our Heavenly Father are telling us.
In this study we will cover one more misrepresented scripture because it
has been quoted many times. First we will see the inconsistency of the argument
against the law, Rom. 10:4, For Messiah is the end of the law, that everyone who has faith may be justified. This
is misinterpreted as saying that Yahshua brought an end to the Law. The word in
Greek translated end is “telos”
Let's look at another scripture that uses the same Greek word when
talking about Yahweh in the days of Job. James 5:11, Behold, we count them happy that endure. Ye have heard of the patience
of Job and have seen the end
of Yahweh: that Yahweh is very
pitiful and full of tender mercy. Both use the same Greek word “telos” If end means
the law has been brought to an end then the other means that Yahweh has been
brought to an end. Is this really the case? Has Yahweh been brought to an end?
What a silly concept! The truth is, neither has been brought to an end. The
Greek word telos does
not mean end in the sense of stopping or bringing something to its final
conclusion. Telos means goal, purpose or aim. Paul says that Messiah is the goal, purpose or aim of the law.
James says we saw the purpose or aim of Yahweh in His dealings with Job.
How then is Yahshua the Messiah the aim or purpose of the law? Remember,
there is no clause in the law that offers eternal life. There is no provision in
the law for forgiveness. The death penalty hung over us all apart from Messiah.
The curse of the law is the penalty demanded by it that we can never pay. The
writings of the prophets tell of One Who would pay that penalty demanded under
the law on our behalf. The Jews missed it. That is why Paul is lamenting his
people. They were attempting to achieve righteousness and a reconciliation to
Yahweh through their own efforts and could not see the futility of their human
works. They could not see that reconciliation and forgiveness comes only through
the atoning sacrifice of the Messiah. The prophets tell of the Messiah.
MESSIAH
THE END OF THE LAW
I pray
this study will help in beginning to see the law as Paul really did from a
positive perspective.
Rom.
7:12, So the law is Holy and the
commandment is Holy, just, and good.
May
Yahweh bless your studies. Elder David Ganton
THE
MESSIAH, TORAH, AND ME
PART
II
By
Matthew Armstrong
One crucial reason for pointing out that it was
the matter found in verse 5 that was the direct cause of the “apostolic
council” is that, with out this foundation some may claim that the
“apostolic council” was only regarding circumcision as a requirement for
salvation – the reality of verse 5 dispels that. This does
make a difference in the sense that, while verse 1 only mentions circumcision,
verse 5 ties both circumcision and Torah together to show us more clearly the
question leading to the apostles coming together.
TWO ISSUES ONE PROBLEM
While it is important to see that it is the issue
in verse 5 that was the immediate cause of the “apostolic council,” there is
a bigger significance with regard to the nature of the two matters that needs to
be realized. While the substance of the two matters are different, they are in
essence saying the same thing. Salvation is a covenant issue. To be part of the
covenant Gentiles must be circumcised and keep Torah. Or to put it another way:
Circumcision and Torah are the signs of covenant membership, unless you are in
the covenant, you can not be saved. When it is said in verse 1 that, “except
you be circumcised…you cannot be saved,” what these “certain men” were
getting at is – circumcision is the sign that makes you part of the covenant,
and you can’t be saved outside the covenant (covenant membership = salvation).
Now to suggest that these men pushing circumcision would not expect Gentiles to
“keep” Torah is like suggesting that a Christian would say “confess with
thy mouth the Lord Y’shua but don’t worry about believing in your heart that
Elohim raised Him from the dead.” Of course, that’s ridiculous! Circumcision
and torah observance go hand in hand. If a Gentile submitted to circumcision, he
was openly submitting to the whole Torah, to do it. This is how the two issues
at hand, that of verse 1 and that of verse 5, are in essence saying the same
thing. Even though the “certain men” only mentioned circumcision, by
implication they were very clearly confirming Torah observance as being
necessary for Gentiles as well. The Pharisees in verse 5 were saying that the
Gentiles who are entering into covenant, i.e. salvation, needed to bear the
marks of covenant membership, that is, circumcision and Torah observance.
FOR SALVATION?
Now that we see that the immediate cause (verse 5)
of the apostolic council and the initial cause in verse 1 are really, in
essence, the same problem being expressed in different ways, we need to address
whether or not the apostles are coming together to consider “a requirement for
salvation” or keeping of Torah (circumcision included) in general.
The key to understanding this complex issue is
“The Covenant.” The Elohim of Israel is a covenant Elohim. As I have already
said, the Jews of the first Century did not view salvation as a works issue
but rather, a covenant issue. Understanding “Covenant Theology” is central
to understanding the major themes of the New Covenant (Testament). If we can see
that “salvation” and “covenant membership” are one and the same we will
begin to get a clearer picture of what is going on in Acts 15. Is it necessary
for Gentiles to be circumcised and keep Torah to be members of the of the
covenant? Are the Gentiles part of the covenant (salvation) even though they do
not bear the signs of covenant membership, namely circumcision and Torah
observance? Can you separate “necessary Torah observance” from a
“requirement for salvation?” Are they mutually exclusive ideas?
To the Israelites salvation came by virtue of
“covenant membership,” the keeping of the Law (Torah) was required for you
to remain “in” covenant membership. It was Elohim’s faithfulness to His
promise, His great mercies and loving kindness to His people that would offer
hope to the Hebrew looking for salvation. Though salvation was not, and is not,
a works issue, the works of Torah (the covenant document) were required for you
to remain as a member of the covenant (salvation). Thus, the idea of
“necessary” Torah observance and Torah observance “as a requirement for
salvation” are not mutually exclusive ideas. Once you were “in” the
covenant, staying “in” did require you to “keep” Torah. That requirement
was indeed “for salvation,” even though salvation in of itself was by grace.
With this understanding of salvation by covenant, covenant membership, and
Torah, I must now point out something that only further establishes this
understanding.
There are many believers that believe it is
necessary for us to keep Torah in general. I say in general because there are a
vast array of conflicting views and opinions with regard to what exactly we are
to “keep,” though the view that we are to keep Torah is agreed upon in
general. It is commonly said among such groups that the issue in Acts 15 is
regarding “ a requirement for salvation,” that being so, the apostles were
not saying Torah observance (in general) for Gentiles was not necessary. I would
like to point out something very interesting with regard to Torah observance as
a requirement for salvation. Let’s look at verse 5 one more time:
But there rose up certain of the
sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, that it was needful to circumcise
them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
Did you notice the fact that these Pharisees were believers?
“…certain of the sect of the
Pharisees which believed,
saying…”
Yes, these were Pharisees that believed, …and they said that circumcision and
the keeping of torah was “needful,” there is no mention of “a requirement
for salvation.” What did they believe? They believed that Yahoshua was the
Messiah!!!
STRONG’S CONCORDANCE
believed
NT:4100
pisteuo
(pist-yoo’-o);
from NT:4102; to have faith (in, upon, or with respect to, a person or thing),
i.e. credit; by implication, to entrust (especially one’s spiritual well-being
to Christ):
That this phrase “…which believed…” is
referring to their belief or faith in the Messiah is clear as this phrase is
used often in this manner. Here are a few examples…Acts 13:39, 10:43, 11:22,
14:1, 17:34, 21:20… Why does it matter that these Pharisees believe in the
Messiah? Because, whatever is meant by “That it was needful to circumcise them, and
to command them to keep the law of Moses.” Has to be within the context of belief in the
Messiah. This puts a new twist to the idea of “a requirement for salvation”
in the traditional sense. Another thing is the fact that it was the
writer of the book of Acts that noted that these were Pharisees “which believed.”
This was the writer’s own observation. This takes away any argument that these
Pharisees weren’t “really” believers. Why would they believe in the
Messiah? For the same reason anyone believes, for the forgiveness of sins, to be
saved, to be justified. See Acts 13:39. Also, we can say most definitely that
the “certain men” of Acts 15:1 whom Paul and Barnabas were dealing with had
to be believers by implication of the circumstances. The dispute between Paul,
Barnabas, and these “certain men” was not about whether Yahshua was the
Messiah but whether gentiles needed to be circumcised to enter into covenant.
Thus the meaning of “Except you be circumcised…you cannot be saved!” must
also be understood from within the context of belief in the Messiah. This
observation is crucial, I believe, in understanding just what the issue that
brought the apostles together was. Any idea that says the issue at hand in Acts
15 was about a requirement for salvation must first fit within the context of
Jews who already believed on the Messiah. This, I think, further illustrates the
fact that the issue was regarding gentiles and torah observance, circumcision
included, in a general covenant sense. Is it necessary for gentiles to be
circumcised (initial “sign”) and keep torah (on-going “sign”) for
covenant membership?
THE BIGGER PROBLEM
Now returning to the text of Acts 15…
6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of
this matter.
So here, in Acts 15:6, we have the apostles coming together for
a specific reason: to consider whether it was needful for the gentiles to be
circumcised and keep the torah to be part of Yahweh’s Covenant People. This is
very significant in that the very men who were instructed by the Messiah seem to
address this issue in some way. Our job is to seriously examine what was said
and see what relevance it has to our question: Do believes in the Messiah, as
partakers of the “new” covenant, need to be seeking to follow and fulfill
the commands of torah in the sense of physically keeping the laws, statutes and
judgments?
Moving on in the text of Acts 15 we come to verse 7 (Note: it is
highly probable that at some point within the dispute in verse 7 that Paul’s
issue of verse 1 was brought forth and expounded upon):
7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said
unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago Yahweh made
choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the
gospel, and believe. 8 And Yahweh, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness,
giving them the Holy Spirit, even as he did unto us; 9 And put no difference
between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why tempt
ye Yahweh, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our
fathers nor we were able to bear?
What I would first like to point out before getting into Peter’s
testimony is, at the beginning of verse 7 it says, “And when there had
been much disputing...” We see here that when the apostles and elders came
together to consider this matter there was “much disputing.”
We see something similar to this in verse 2: “When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small
dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and
Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles
and elders about this question.
Now I want to note the following verse often referred to as “The Great
Commission”… Matt. 28:19-20, Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Spirit: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:
and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
As you just read, in Acts 15: 2, 7 we see the apostles disputing,
i.e. questioning, arguing, over a “doctrinal” issue. Notice when the Messiah
gave the apostles the “Great Commission” He told them specifically to
“teach all nations” “…to
observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.”
What’s my point? There is no doubt that those apostles which were sent to
preach the risen Messiah among the Nations, preached and taught what they
understood the Messiah Himself to have taught. The question is, were they
teaching torah observance in its traditional sense? Another way to put that
question would be thus: Why do we see an apparent confusion, disputing, and
conflict over whether Gentiles need to keep torah (circumcision included),
requiring the apostles to come together to consider the matter, if the Messiah
clearly taught that Gentiles were to keep torah?
That is something to think about.
I believe we cannot say that the Messiah taught
that Gentiles were not to keep torah. But I also believe we
cannot say that Messiah taught clearly that Gentiles were to keep torah either, by the very fact that the apostles had to
“consider the matter.” They obviously had some difference of opinion and, as
I already mentioned, this shows that when Messiah said “go…and teach all
nations…to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you” this did not
specifically mean to the apostles, “teach torah.” It is within this light
that we begin to see the reason of the question of “covenant membership” and
gentiles. It seems that the reality was, the apostles, as
a whole, had
not dealt directly with this question before it came up in Acts 15. The message
of the Gospel had just recently been voiced abroad, and the implication of the
record we have in Acts suggests that they, the apostles, really weren’t sure
about this issue, that of Gentiles and covenant membership, i.e. circumcision,
and the law, was inevitably going to happen and it was this very reality, that
it did happen. That further propelled the apostles to realize the newly
developing role of the Holy Spirit and what belief in Messiah meant to a fuller
extent, what membership in the New Covenant was all about.
To finish this thought I would like to simply
state that the full revelation of what significance this has can not be
addressed in entirety here. However, it should have given you something to
further consider and investigate. What is the significance of Matthew 28:19-20,
John 14:26 (THE QUESTION OF Gentiles and covenant membership came after
receiving the Holy Spirit), and many other verses, in this light? What were the
apostles teaching the gentiles?
John 14:26, But the Comforter, which is the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
Now back to the text of Acts 15… I believe that one of the most
important elements to the issue at hand is understanding the testimony that
Peter gives in verses 7-11. I just mentioned that it seems the apostles and
elders weren’t totally sure about the gentiles and the newly developing
covenant, as they had difference of opinion about this very important issue.
However, although the apostles, as a whole,
had not dealt directly with this issue,
Peter had (Acts 10 and 11) Peter becomes the man of
the moment.
7 And when there had been much
disputing,
Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good
while ago Yahweh made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear
the word of the gospel, and believe. 8 and Yahweh, which knoweth the hearts,
bare them witness, giving them the Holy Spirit, even as he did unto us; 9 And
put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
What Peter has just said, particularly in verse 8 and 9, can not be
taken lightly, especially in its first
Century context. No torah observant Jew of the First Century would have been able to swallow this very
rash statement that Peter just made with out first experiencing a moment of
question and confusion. Once again, the context is very important. The Jews were
in a Roman dominated world, they themselves subject to Gentiles as Judea was
under Roman rule. There was a spirit of revolt very alive and well amongst the
zealous Jew as they awaited the day that the Elohim of the world, the Elohim of
Israel would vindicate His chosen people in the face of her evil pagan enemies.
The oppression of the Jews at the hands of ungodly “unclean” Gentiles left a
bitter taste in the mouths of those longing for the kingdom to be restored to
Israel.
It is within this context that Peter testifies that the “unclean”
Gentiles had received the Holy
Spirit. How
could the Gentiles, who were sinners (Gal. 2:15), be given the Holy Spirit? What
does this mean? Notice the fact that Peter brings this peculiar reality to the
attention of the apostles in the midst of a dispute about whether Gentiles are to be circumcised and keep torah. Remember, physical circumcision was
the sign of the covenant; torah was the covenant document; salvation was a
covenant issue. Without these accompanying signs, are Gentiles part of the
(salvation) covenant? Here in verse 9 Peter says something as disturbing as it
was revealing. Yahweh had put no difference between the (torah observant) Jew
and the Gentile, since he has purified their hearts by faith. While the natural
reaction of the first
Century Jew would undoubtedly be to see the believing Gentiles as “lower
class,” Peter is astonishingly proclaiming that, to Elohim there is no
difference between them.
This is the great work and meaning of the risen Messiah, the establishment of
the New Covenant, the breaking presence of the Kingdom of Elohim, the out
pouring of His Holy Spirit…all of which are inseparable.
What we find in Peter’s testimony thus far is that, with regards
to whether the gentiles need to be circumcised and keep torah, he says,
“Yahweh, which
knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Spirit, even as he gave
it to the Jews (who were circumcised and practicing torah). This (and his
revelation of the vision in Acts 10) signaled to Peter that Elohim put no
difference between “us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.” If the
issue at hand was regarding the signs of covenant membership, as I believe it
was, Peter seems to be confirming that the gentiles are part of the covenant
without the traditional signs of the covenant membership (circumcision and
torah), as Elohim has purified their hearts by faith, the giving of the Holy
Spirit being the evidence of this.
To be continued……...