Photo by Oaxoax
Many Christians believe that Torah Observance is for "Israel" or Jews alone.
Why? Because they believe that through Jesus, Christians are saved by grace and not through their actions. Grace is God's unmerited favour and it is through God's grace that "he gave his only son to die so that any one who believes in Jesus would have everlasting life" (John 3.16). Thus it is reasoned that if Jews don't believe in Christ then the only path to salvation for them is slavish obedience to all 613 commandments.
Clearly, no one has ever perfectly observed all 613 commandments so this was why the system of sacrifices was conceived to atone for all the sins of Israel and it was under this same system that Christ gave His life for all. But if you read the commandments carefully, would it surprise you to learn that none of the sacrifices can atone for intentional sin? Yes, its true (see Leviticus 4.2). Jews recognise this too. The Artscroll Stone Edition Chumash comments on Leviticus 4 says:
"The Torah now lists offerings that are required in order to atone for sins, in contrast to the offerings of the previous three chapters that one brings voluntarily in order to elevate oneself spiritually.
These offerings cannot atone for sins that were committed intentionally. No offering is sufficient to remove the stain of sin committed intentionally. No offering is sufficient to remove the stain of such sinfulness; that can be done only through repentance and a change of the attitudes that made it possible for the transgressor to flout God's will."
You may have thought that repentance is a Christian message. Actually the theme of repentance is there in the Old Testament and its not a New Testament invention.
Thus the sacrificial system atones for unintentional sin. Therefore Christ died for our unintentional sins. And for His sacrifice to have any validity for the Christian the Torah must also remain in effect. The only remedy for our intentional sins is repentance.
The Hebrew word for Repentance means to turn around; i.e. that is to change direction by 180 degrees. The concept of Repentance is intimately connected to one's actions and not just to one's attitudes and beliefs.
Repentance from what? Our sins. But how can we know what is sin? The Hebrew word for Sin means to "miss the mark" in English. But what sets the Mark or Standard of Behaviour? The Bible or Torah defines it. Therefore when our actions fall below its standards, we sin. Thus Torah Observance is the way we should live under God.
Next time, I will argue that Christians are also subject to the Torah because they are also a part of Israel.
6 comments:
If Christ died to atone for unintentional sin, then what was he resurrected for?
Hi Ben
There are several purposes for the resurrection, some of which are:
1. It vindicates Christ's sacrifice. If he wasn't raised from the dead then one could argue that there is no evidence that his sacrifice was effective.
2. That through his resurrection we can bear fruit to God (Rom 7.4).
3. That it gives us hope for our own future resurrection (Rom 8.11).
HTH
Tony.
Hi Tony. Sorry, I didn't see your response there until now.
In terms of Torah observance, I see those first two purposes you mention for the resurrection as having a relevance I would pick up on (to argue against observance).
For Christ's sacrifice to be effective, he had to live in perfect observance of the Torah, then die in place of the guilty ones. He did this - just like a sacrificial lamb, which was unblemished. There is no resurrection for the lamb - why should there be for Christ? But you are right, it does provide proof of his deity, thereby proving his sacrifice effective.
That passage in Romans 7 seems to me to say that we are free from the law. With our participation in His death we are set free from it, and in his resurrection we are brought into the way of the spirit.
Ben
Chapter 7, at first sight, certainly does appear to support the notion that Christian life is conducted by way of the Spirit, to the exclusion of Torah Observance.
Is this in fact what Paul meant in this passage? A contextual analysis from a number of perspectives may shed some light on the question.
The perspectives we shall consider are:
1. Would the advocacy of the abolition of Torah Observance be consistent with what we know about Paul and his historical conduct?
2. What conclusions can be drawn from his writings on the question of Torah observance?
Let us consider these items:
1. Paul's background and conduct
Paul was a disciple of Gamaliel a revered Rabbi and one of the most famous of Pharisees. It is a sect known for its high regard for the Torah. It was out of this zeal that led him to persecute Jesus' disciples for they were reputed to have forsaken the Torah and were leading many astray. Would such a person then shift his allegiance so easily on the strength of a supernatural experience? The Torah in Deuteronomy 13, clearly warns against supernatural phenomena that leads to forsaking obedience to God's commandments (the Torah). Even to this day this continues to be one of the principal Jewish objections to Jesus being the Messiah.
It is interesting to observe that Paul continues to lead a Torah observant life after his conversion.
In Acts 23.6 Paul continues to count himself a Pharisee and a number of Pharisees were counted among the believers (see Acts 15). How could he or the other believers consider himself or themselves Pharisees if they had forsaken Torah Observance?
Later in Acts 18.21 he plans on returning to Jerusalem to attend a pilgrim festival after taking a Naziritic vow (Acts 18.18).
Clearly Paul's teaching could be construed to teach abolishing Torah Observance. many Jews were persuaded that this was the case. When he reaches Jerusalem in Acts 21, Paul takes measures to dispel the rumours that he is teaching gentian not to be Torah observant.
Are these the acts of someone who is advocating the end of Torah observance?
2. Paul's writings on the Torah
Paul wrote that the Torah was inspired (2 Timothy 3.16) , righteous, good, (Romans 7.12 and 1 Timothy 1.8) and spiritual (Romans 7.14).
Therefore he could not have meant the Torah when he referred to "the letter."
Romans 7
In Romans 2.28-29 Paul describes people who are physically circumcised but disobey the Torah and therefore they do not possess the true faith. Thus "the letter" here means someone who is a believer outwardly but someone who "keeps the righteous requirements of the law" (Romans 2.26).
Paul uses the term "the letter" in 2 Corinthians 3 where he speaks of being ministers of the new [also could be translated "renewed"] covenant. However here he is saying that in order to do so one must minister together with the Holy Spirit.
So what does "the letter" mean? It means to act without the Holy Spirit, only outwardly and not from within.
Thus Romans 7 is not saying life in the Spirit and keeping the righteous requirements of the law (i.e. being Torah Observant) are mutually exclusive. Rather Paul is saying that through Jesus we are freed from the penalties of the law rightly applying to us because of our sins. Now we can carry on in life living according to the Tarah through the Holy Spirit and not just in appearance or in independent effort without the Holy Spirit.
Tony
Titus 3:9 FF, please explain...
Hi Anonymous
Titus 3.9 (NKJV) says:
"But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless."
To understand what this verse is about it is necessary to consider the context of this text within the book and the known context of the book itself.
This will require a bit of reading and I will get back to you when I have completed it.
Here are some initial thoughts on the Titus 3.9:
Should the verse be taken to mean that all disputes should be avoided? That can't be a correct interpretation otherwise why would the Apostles write most of the epistles, where they are clearly dealing with one dispute or another?
Clearly some issues are foolish and others are not. How do you figure out which is which?
Discussion and debate is an invaluable tool for learning and understanding the scriptures. Discussing and debating the Law (or commandments) is inevitable as one tries to practically obey them, since to love Jesus is to obey His commandments. HTH
Post a Comment