We don’t need Jesus as much as our ancient forbears did.
That’s not to say that we don’t need the forgiveness of our sins. Absolutely, we desperately need that. And we need a relationship with God. It is a wonderful feeling to know that, if we ever need God, we can pray to him and He’s there for us. It’s good to have that security blanket, if we ever need Him. And, of course, we need Him everyday. That’s why we need to pray daily. Because we need Him.
So why don’t we pray?
Well, sure, we prayed for Aunt Marge just last week. She was going into surgery. But she’s okay, because the doctors fixed her right up. And we prayed for Tim, from our church, because he was going to Africa to visit some people who needed help. We prayed for his protection. He got back okay. Of course, we knew that air travel is the safest way to go. And there weren’t any wars where he was going. But we’re glad we prayed, just in case.
And, of course, we worship God. Some of us do it just on Sundays, and some every day. But we recognize that its our responsibility to worship Him because He gave us life and created the world and provided us with the basics of every living thing. So we thank him for our food, although we know that it came from stores after being processed after being grown in farms. But somewhere back there, God did something to get us the food, so we thank Him. It’s only respectful.
It’s not like we believe that God doesn’t work today. We certainly recognize God’s power in our lives. It’s not like God is just some clockworker who put in the rechargeable battery and let it go. So why do we often practically act like deists? Why does it seem as if our lives wouldn’t really be any different if we were just trying to be “good people”?
Isn’t Christianity supposed to be something more intense? What are we missing?
Honestly, what we are missing is salvation.
“No, no,” you interrupt, “you don’t understand. We HAVE salvation. We have it in Jesus. Jesus died on the cross. We believe. So we have forgiveness and a relationship with God. We already have it.”
The problem is that forgiveness is only one part of salvation. It’s important, that’s true, but its not the whole ball of wax. Jesus offered us a lot more than just forgiveness. He offers us the kingdom of God. That’s quite a package. It’s just that so few people really know what it all entails.
When Jesus offered us the kingdom, he offered us a nation of justice. He offered us a nation that acts on the principle of caring for everyone, without exception, so that everyone will be cared for. Justice is in Jesus’ hands, and he offers it to us. All we have to do is
But we already have justice, don’t we? That’s what we are told. We live in a great nation of equality, where no one receives special treatment because of who they are. Everyone is treated the same, no matter what their sex or their race or their social class or their wealth. Everyone receives the same justice, the same opportunities… or, at least, that’s how it is supposed to work.
I guess perhaps we don’t all have justice. I guess there is still people of color who don’t receive equal treatment. There are still women and even men who are refused jobs because of their sex. There are immigrants and the homeless who aren’t treated with fairness. There are still the mentally ill who are not given a fair shake. So maybe we still need Jesus’ offer of justice after all.
When Jesus offered the kingdom of God, he was offering the outcast and lowly the opportunity to be rulers over the world. He proclaimed good news to the poor, freedom to the prisoners and a new start to sinners. Anyone could have the opportunity to lead in Jesus’ kingdom—they didn’t have to be rich or popular or part of a ruling class or a certain educational level. Anyone could be powerful or have authority through the Holy Spirit, and rule with Jesus.
But in our society, we already have that, don’t we. After all, any kid in America could be whatever they want to be. If a kid wants to be part of the police or an astronaut or even President of the whole country all they have to do is work hard and nothing will stop them from achieving their goal, right?
But, actually, I wanted to be an astronaut until I found out that very few people could be in the few slots available for the position. And I wasn’t good enough at science anyway. Maybe, they said, I could be a social worker. And as far as president? When was the last time a homeless person became president? Or a woman? Or a person of color? When was the last time an uneducated person become president? No, the presidency is for a very few. I guess we need Jesus’ salvation for the outcast after all.
When Jesus offered us the kingdom of God, he offered us God’s knowledge and wisdom in all things. He offered us the opportunity to know God’s righteousness and to know the hidden things of God. We can have the Holy Spirit who will guide us in our lives and give us wisdom in every circumstance.
But maybe we don’t need that knowledge anymore. After all, we have great colleges and universities where we can learn anything of importance. We have the internet to pick up any other kind of fact that we need. And we have counselors and psychologists to offer us wisdom and counsel in our lives.
On the other hand, I never really learned that much in college. I mean it was helpful, but it really only pointed the way. And the ethics courses were pretty sketchy. And though I can get a lot of facts in our society, I can’t tell the difference between Truth and the various forms of untruth that are floating around out there. It’s so hard to tell the difference. And I’ve got a friend, who is at least as sane as me, and the counselor keeps telling her that she’s got multiple personality disorder. How many of those counselors and psychiatrists really understand us, who we really are, as individuals? Perhaps we need Jesus’ salvation for wisdom after all.
When Jesus offered us the kingdom of God, he said that God would provide everything we need. He said that we wouldn’t need to worry about food and clothing—God has got us covered (so to speak). He said that he would heal our diseases and care for our wounds. All of our basic needs would be provided for.
But we don’t need God for that anymore. I’m sure that the ancients needed God for their daily bread and health, but, frankly, us Americans are doing pretty well. After all, I’ve never missed a meal in my life. And I’ve eaten pretty well, if I can judge by my waistline. We’ve got clean water and hot water and running water and sanitary water—that’s something! And we have a better health system than ever seen in history. More people are healed in a city hospital in one day than Jesus did in a year of ministry.
Of course, people are mostly healed. There is very little joy in healing, like with Jesus. People sometimes seem sicker after their “healing” than before. And I eat well and live well, it is true. But why do I feel so guilty? Why is there no satisfaction, not even any contentment, with my prosperity? And why are there so many in the U.S. that don’t experience that prosperity? Why are there children who are hungry, families who are homeless and strong men crippled by work? Perhaps we need Jesus’ salvation of prosperity after all.
When Jesus offered us the kingdom of God, he promised us a society of God. He said that we would have a society which would be our family, and we would have tight-knit bonds. If any person was in need, the others would help them out. Everyone would be supported and helped.
But our society seems fine. It offers a lot of variety, a lot of opportunity. There are support groups everywhere, for every kind of issue. There are churches and clubs and societies. And if anyone is really in need, they could ask for it. Or get welfare.
On the other hand, our society seems full of violence. And full of hatreds. And there isn’t much forgiveness. And I don’t know if I remember the name of anyone in my support group. And I think I lied. There’s no one who will really help us in need. And welfare is humiliating.
When Jesus offered us the kingdom of God, he promised us a secure future. We would be resurrected from the dead, and we would have eternal life. We would be completely defended by God and there would be no more sorrows. All the future would be ours, if only we would trust in Him
But our future seems fine. We have the possibility of a comfortable retirement. We have insurance to cover the worst of disasters—fire, flood, death, disease. And we are secure in the hands of the U.S. military and the local police. They keep things pretty secure.
But, actually, we are pretty nervous. We depended on Social Security, and we aren’t confident in it anymore. We depended on insurance, and they said they wouldn’t pay for our disaster. We had to take them to court to get the money we were promised. And I would feel secure with the military and police, if only I could trust them. If only I wasn’t afraid of what they would do. As well as all the criminals and terrorists they miss. I suppose that we still need Jesus salvation for the future.
When Jesus offered the kingdom of God, he was speaking about God’s rule. God would be our Lord and Master and King. No one would take us from his hand. No one would rule over us, only God through Jesus.
But, frankly, we don’t really want to be ruled by anyone. I am the master of my own destiny, and I don’t really want anyone telling me what to do. I have my own principles to live by. I have my own ambitions. It is enough for me to make my own decisions. It is enough that I am in charge of my own life and I am independent of all rule. Even God’s.
I think I understand now why we are practical deists. Because we are content with what we already have. We have made our own decisions and we have obtained the salvation the world offers, and why do we need any thing else?
Except… that I made a mess of my life already. I am depressed, sometimes forsaken, often sick. My life is miserable, and I can’t blame anyone but myself. I don’t know if I want to be independent. I’m just not strong enough, not wise enough, not secure enough, not happy enough. Maybe—just maybe—I really need Jesus to take over my life.
There is a salvation that America offers us. It is often called the American dream. We could fit into our society and live out this dream. We could be consumers, and have whatever material things we want. We could gain a high position socially. We could live in a society of mutual respect and opportunity. We could have security for our family and our children’s children.
That’s the promise. There’s only two problems with this promise.
First of all, it’s a lie. America cannot deliver it to us. It never has, and it never will. The government and society is inadequate for what the American dream promises.
Also, Jesus’ offer is much better. The kingdom of God is a more complete version of the salvation America offers.
Some of our greatest heroes, we have been told, offered us salvation. George Washington. Thomas Jefferson. Abraham Lincoln. Franklin Roosevelt. Martin Luther King, Jr. They offered us equality. They offered us prosperity. They offered us a glorious destiny. It was an empty promise. It was an offer without any substance.
Only Jesus’ promise is the real thing. The real salvation.
Friday, April 11, 2008
Friday, April 04, 2008
Paul and the Law (The NT and the Law, Part 5)
(Please read parts 1-4 for the whole argument to make sense)
Paul had the law woven into his life. He grew up submitted to the law, studied it, became an expert in it and on the basis of that law he persecuted Christians. Then he saw Jesus as Lord of heaven and everything he once knew changed. He was still an expert in the law, but he submitted it all to Jesus’ understanding and will.
There has been much disagreement throughout church history about what Paul’s opinion about the law is. Some believed that Paul held that Satan wrote the law and Jesus delivered us from it. Others have said that Paul completely supported the law. A popular opinion is that Paul was opposed to following any laws—whether Moses’ or a church’s— holding only to faith in Jesus. To understand Paul’s perspective, we have to read him carefully, and not place our own opinions about the Law in his mouth. When we read Paul carefully, we find that he at least had these opinions about Moses’ law:
Paul was in agreement with Jesus and the early church about the Law
The Law was from God
Paul firmly acknowledged that the Law of Moses was good, not evil, and that it came from God to Moses (Romans 7:12; Galatians 3:19, 21)
Everyone born under Moses must submit to the Law
Like Jesus, Peter and the other apostles, Paul lived in full submission to Moses Law all of his life, even after he was a Christian (Acts 21:24). He also affirmed that Jews under the Law were given a special gift from God to preserve the Law and keep it.
Jesus gave us a higher law to live by
Paul agrees with Jesus and James that Jesus gave us a law to live by, and it is that higher law—not the law of Moses—by which we will be judged. If we live by that higher law, Paul writes, we will have fulfilled all of the law of Moses and more. (Romans 13:8-10)
Gentiles are not required to live under Moses’ law, but Jesus’ law and faith
Paul was in full agreement with the early church that Gentiles did not need to follow the law of Moses because they were never put in submission to it. It is enough that they have faith in Jesus, even as Abraham did. (Galatians 2:15-16)
Paul said the law has no power to help people obey it
Although the law is good and comes from God, it is weak. All it does is communicate what sin is, but it doesn’t give any power to help a person get sin out of their lives. It is a standard, but it has no ability to assist a person who wants to live it, even the one who fully loves the law. (Romans 7:14-15, 8:3)
Paul said the law condemns everyone who lives under it
Because the law has no power to help those submitted to it obey it, everyone who attempts to live under the law will disobey it. Every human is weak, and we are tempted by Satan to disobey God, and, left to our own devices, that is exactly what we will do. We will disobey the very thing we have submitted ourselves to. But the law also makes it clear, if we disobey it or rebel against it, then we will die. Thus the law ends up condemning and killing everyone who is under it. (Romans 7:13-20, 3:9-20)
Paul said that Satan uses the law to destroy people
God gave the Law to Israel to point the way to life, to be holy and pure before God. But Satan recognized the weakness of humans and used the Law as a tool of disobedience. He deceived them to be unfaithful to the law and to God, and so be condemned to death. Once they were condemned to death, Satan had them under his power, for Satan has authority over all who are judged. And Satan desires lordship over people in order to destroy them. In this way, the Law became the tool of Satan for destruction, instead of what it was originally made for. (Romans 6:16; 7:7-12, 25)
Paul said the law is a part of the powers that Jesus delivers us from
Jesus not only delivers us from Satan and death, but from everything that led us to death—including the Law. Again, Paul says that the Law became the tool of Satan, and so it is no longer worthwhile for salvation. But through Jesus’ death and resurrection we have gained freedom from all of that. We no longer must go to God through the Law, instead we go to God through Jesus. Thus, we must not consider that the law is what will bring us to God, for we need only Jesus. (Romans 8:1-4; Colossians 2:11-17). In this way, Jews who follow Jesus obey the law, but only in the way that a Christian would submit to the laws of the nation he or she is living under—because we submit to worldly authorities while we live under them (Romans 13:1-7)
Paul said that gentiles should not put themselves under the law, if they need the Law to save them
There were many in Paul’s day who thought that every Christian—even those who were not born under the law—needed to submit themselves to Moses’ law before they could be truly pleasing to God. Many gentiles under Paul’s care were influenced by this and felt that they needed to put themselves under Moses’ law through circumcision in order to be truly saved. Paul was firm in his understanding that to submit to Moses’ law was to seek salvation from the world, and to separate oneself from Jesus. In Jesus alone is found salvation, and to share that place with any other power is to deny Jesus. (Galatians 4:1-9; 5:1-4)
Paul said that a gentile can put himself under the law in order to minister to Jews
This did not mean, however, that a gentile could not be circumcised. Paul himself circumcised Timothy (a gentile), thus placing him in submission to the Law, not to save Timothy, but to help him fulfill God’s calling on his life. Timothy was called to be an evangelist, with Paul, and in that he would have to be submitted to the Law in all things. This was to make it so that Jews would listen to Timothy when he preached the gospel. Thus some can willingly put themselves in slavery, if it would allow the gospel to be preached. (Acts 16:1-3; I Corinthians 9:19-23)
The Law is God’s will, circumvented by Satan.
But Jesus set us free from the Law.
Paul had the law woven into his life. He grew up submitted to the law, studied it, became an expert in it and on the basis of that law he persecuted Christians. Then he saw Jesus as Lord of heaven and everything he once knew changed. He was still an expert in the law, but he submitted it all to Jesus’ understanding and will.
There has been much disagreement throughout church history about what Paul’s opinion about the law is. Some believed that Paul held that Satan wrote the law and Jesus delivered us from it. Others have said that Paul completely supported the law. A popular opinion is that Paul was opposed to following any laws—whether Moses’ or a church’s— holding only to faith in Jesus. To understand Paul’s perspective, we have to read him carefully, and not place our own opinions about the Law in his mouth. When we read Paul carefully, we find that he at least had these opinions about Moses’ law:
Paul was in agreement with Jesus and the early church about the Law
The Law was from God
Paul firmly acknowledged that the Law of Moses was good, not evil, and that it came from God to Moses (Romans 7:12; Galatians 3:19, 21)
Everyone born under Moses must submit to the Law
Like Jesus, Peter and the other apostles, Paul lived in full submission to Moses Law all of his life, even after he was a Christian (Acts 21:24). He also affirmed that Jews under the Law were given a special gift from God to preserve the Law and keep it.
Jesus gave us a higher law to live by
Paul agrees with Jesus and James that Jesus gave us a law to live by, and it is that higher law—not the law of Moses—by which we will be judged. If we live by that higher law, Paul writes, we will have fulfilled all of the law of Moses and more. (Romans 13:8-10)
Gentiles are not required to live under Moses’ law, but Jesus’ law and faith
Paul was in full agreement with the early church that Gentiles did not need to follow the law of Moses because they were never put in submission to it. It is enough that they have faith in Jesus, even as Abraham did. (Galatians 2:15-16)
Paul said the law has no power to help people obey it
Although the law is good and comes from God, it is weak. All it does is communicate what sin is, but it doesn’t give any power to help a person get sin out of their lives. It is a standard, but it has no ability to assist a person who wants to live it, even the one who fully loves the law. (Romans 7:14-15, 8:3)
Paul said the law condemns everyone who lives under it
Because the law has no power to help those submitted to it obey it, everyone who attempts to live under the law will disobey it. Every human is weak, and we are tempted by Satan to disobey God, and, left to our own devices, that is exactly what we will do. We will disobey the very thing we have submitted ourselves to. But the law also makes it clear, if we disobey it or rebel against it, then we will die. Thus the law ends up condemning and killing everyone who is under it. (Romans 7:13-20, 3:9-20)
Paul said that Satan uses the law to destroy people
God gave the Law to Israel to point the way to life, to be holy and pure before God. But Satan recognized the weakness of humans and used the Law as a tool of disobedience. He deceived them to be unfaithful to the law and to God, and so be condemned to death. Once they were condemned to death, Satan had them under his power, for Satan has authority over all who are judged. And Satan desires lordship over people in order to destroy them. In this way, the Law became the tool of Satan for destruction, instead of what it was originally made for. (Romans 6:16; 7:7-12, 25)
Paul said the law is a part of the powers that Jesus delivers us from
Jesus not only delivers us from Satan and death, but from everything that led us to death—including the Law. Again, Paul says that the Law became the tool of Satan, and so it is no longer worthwhile for salvation. But through Jesus’ death and resurrection we have gained freedom from all of that. We no longer must go to God through the Law, instead we go to God through Jesus. Thus, we must not consider that the law is what will bring us to God, for we need only Jesus. (Romans 8:1-4; Colossians 2:11-17). In this way, Jews who follow Jesus obey the law, but only in the way that a Christian would submit to the laws of the nation he or she is living under—because we submit to worldly authorities while we live under them (Romans 13:1-7)
Paul said that gentiles should not put themselves under the law, if they need the Law to save them
There were many in Paul’s day who thought that every Christian—even those who were not born under the law—needed to submit themselves to Moses’ law before they could be truly pleasing to God. Many gentiles under Paul’s care were influenced by this and felt that they needed to put themselves under Moses’ law through circumcision in order to be truly saved. Paul was firm in his understanding that to submit to Moses’ law was to seek salvation from the world, and to separate oneself from Jesus. In Jesus alone is found salvation, and to share that place with any other power is to deny Jesus. (Galatians 4:1-9; 5:1-4)
Paul said that a gentile can put himself under the law in order to minister to Jews
This did not mean, however, that a gentile could not be circumcised. Paul himself circumcised Timothy (a gentile), thus placing him in submission to the Law, not to save Timothy, but to help him fulfill God’s calling on his life. Timothy was called to be an evangelist, with Paul, and in that he would have to be submitted to the Law in all things. This was to make it so that Jews would listen to Timothy when he preached the gospel. Thus some can willingly put themselves in slavery, if it would allow the gospel to be preached. (Acts 16:1-3; I Corinthians 9:19-23)
The Law is God’s will, circumvented by Satan.
But Jesus set us free from the Law.
The Early Jerusalem Church and the Law (The NT and the Law Part 4)
(This one is just an outline, not a full text-- sorry)
James was a completely observant Jew, honored for his righteousness within Jerusalem.
James held that the “royal law” was to “love your neighbor as yourself.”
James offered eschatalogical blessings on those who kept the higher law.
James commanded all to be doers of the higher law
James condemned those who would judge the higher law by speaking against it or disobeying it.
Peter was also a completely observant Jew.
Peter was submissive to Jewish authorities, established by the Mosaic Law, but disobeyed them when they commanded contrary to Jesus.
Peter was commanded by God to eat unclean food—disobedient to the Mosaic Law— in a vision.
Peter welcomed Gentiles as the faithful in Jesus apart from the Mosaic Law.
Peter and Paul saw Gentiles receive of the Holy Spirit apart from the Mosaic Law.
The Jerusalem Church recommended that Gentiles in Jesus not be joined to the Mosaic Law.
The Jerusalem Church recommended that Gentiles in Christ obey these universal laws:
a. Be pure from sexual immorality
b. Do not eat blood or things that are strangled
c. Be separated from things contaminated by idolatry
d. Give to the poor
James was a completely observant Jew, honored for his righteousness within Jerusalem.
James held that the “royal law” was to “love your neighbor as yourself.”
James offered eschatalogical blessings on those who kept the higher law.
James commanded all to be doers of the higher law
James condemned those who would judge the higher law by speaking against it or disobeying it.
Peter was also a completely observant Jew.
Peter was submissive to Jewish authorities, established by the Mosaic Law, but disobeyed them when they commanded contrary to Jesus.
Peter was commanded by God to eat unclean food—disobedient to the Mosaic Law— in a vision.
Peter welcomed Gentiles as the faithful in Jesus apart from the Mosaic Law.
Peter and Paul saw Gentiles receive of the Holy Spirit apart from the Mosaic Law.
The Jerusalem Church recommended that Gentiles in Jesus not be joined to the Mosaic Law.
The Jerusalem Church recommended that Gentiles in Christ obey these universal laws:
a. Be pure from sexual immorality
b. Do not eat blood or things that are strangled
c. Be separated from things contaminated by idolatry
d. Give to the poor
Did Jesus Oppose The Law? (The Law and the NT Part 3)
At least some in Jesus’ day claimed that Jesus was attempting to set aside Moses’ Law. And certainly many of Jesus’ Gentile followers thought that he did. On the one hand, Jesus claims to not be opposed to the Law in any way (Matt 5:17). He opposes anyone who lessens the Law (Matt. 5:19). On the other hand, he claims that a law of Moses was given just to appease the children of Israel’s “hardness of heart”. And he seemed to have many instances in which he opposed Moses’ Law. Or did he? Let’s look at some of Jesus’ teachings that seem to contradict Moses:
1. Divorce—
Matthew 19:1-9 v Deuteronomy 24:1
When confronted with Moses’ command to give a certificate of divorce, Jesus claims that the law was a concession to the disloyal hearts of Israelites, and that divorce was never in God’s plan. He uses another part of the Law which confirms that marriage is established by God (Genesis 1:24). Thus, he concludes, divorce should only be allowed if adultery is found—because adultery would break the covenant of marriage even without divorce. While it seems that Jesus is contradicting Moses, on the surface, Jesus is not actually opposing the law, here. The original law was to make a divorce official by having it be written in order to prevent remarriage. Thus the certificate is less about divorce than to disallow remarriage. Thus, Jesus is bringing the law back to its original intent—preventing remarriage, rather than allowing divorce. Jesus then expands the law opposing remarriage in Deuteronomy 24 to include any kind of remarriage except that following adultery, based on Genesis 1. Thus, Jesus is not opposing Moses, but making the law more consistent with itself and God’s plan in creation. The higher law of faithfulness to a covenant and preventing others from sinning trumps the allowance of divorce.
2. Cleanliness—
Matthew 15:10-20 v. Leviticus 5:2
Jesus claims that it is not what one touches or eats that makes one unclean, but the intent of one’s heart. This seems to contradict Moses who says that what one touches can make one unclean. Jesus, however, does not deny the actions that one should do to remain clean in the law—he is not opposed to bathing, but only mandatory washing before meals (which is found in the oral law, not the written). He could be speaking about the “real” cleanness that will matter on the judgement day, not the day to day cleanness that is significant in contemporary human society. Jesus is not contradicting Moses, but highlighting the moral law.
3. Loving enemies—
Matthew 5:42-48 v. Deuteronomy 23:6
The Law tells the Israelites who to hate, while Jesus says to hate no one—to even love one’s enemies. However, the Law is very specific about who one is to hate—Moabites, Amorites and Canaanites. Other nations are not to be “hated” or done evil to, even if they do evil (Edom and Egypt—Deut 23:7). Yahweh rescinded his command about the Canaanites (Deut. 20:17; Judges 2:20-3:6). The separation was later to be not to intermarry with these tribes (Gen. 28:1; Judges 3:5-7;Ezra 9:1-3). The Canaanites survived to the time of Jesus, but he granted them the eschatalogical promise to Israel if they displayed faith (Matthew 15). Thus, Jesus is not contradicting Moses, but taking a basic principle of the law—“Love of neighbor” and applying it more broadly.
4. Oaths—
Matt. 5:34-37; Matthew 23:16-22 v. Numbers 30:3
Rather than just emphasizing the keeping of oaths, Jesus is denying any oath-speech used in a promise. Moses’ law just demands that one keeps the oath one makes. Moses, of course, is not demanding that people make oaths. So Jesus is not contradicting Moses, but heightening the demand. Jesus is emphasizing honest speech for the sake of others in Matthew 5. In Matthew 23, Jesus argues against oath-taking for the sake of devotion. Overall, Jesus is saying that oath-making is less important than integrity and faithfulness to God. Thus, the higher law trumps the allowance of oath-making.
5. Harvesting and preparing food on Sabbath—
Matthew 12:1-8 v. Leviticus 25:4
In Matthew, the disciples are plucking and eating grain as they pass through a field on the Sabbath. Harvesting food is forbidden on the Sabbath, according to the law and Jesus is attacked by the Pharisees for allowing them to do it. Jesus, however, gives a number of examples showing in the Scriptures how one law is contradicted and set aside for a greater one: a. David ate the consecrated bread intended by law only for priests (I Samuel 21:1-6; Leviticus 24: 5-9). Thus, the cultic demand is marginalized due to the need of doing mercy to the King's servant b. The priests do not keep the Sabbath, but do their work during the Sabbath. Thus, the Sabbath command is marginalized by the need to maintain the temple pure. Thus, the disciples are innocent of wrongdoing before God, because although they may have technically broken the Sabbath laws against harvesting and preparing food (Exodus 20:10; 31:14-15), but they were living out the law of mercy for the sake of the ministry to a king— even as David did of old. Again, Jesus is not contradicting Moses, but prioritizing the law in an internal conflict
6. Honoring Father and Mother—
Matthew 8:21-22 v. Exodus 20:12
One should always honor one’s parents, and one kind of honoring is to bury the dead. However, when a potential disciple asks Jesus to bury his father, Jesus refuses him, telling him to let the “dead bury their own dead”. This seems to contradict the command to honor one’s parents. However, Jesus is not contradicting it. First of all, Jesus is prioritizing work for God’s kingdom before participating in honoring one’s parents, just as Jesus prioritizes God’s kingdom work over many other necessary things (Matthew 6:33). On the other hand, burying is not so much a sign of honor, unless there is no one else to bury them. The important thing is that the body gets buried, and not left exposed. As long as someone is burying the body—as Jesus says there is—then no dishonor is there.
7. Tithing—
Matthew 23:22-23 v. Leviticus 27:30
Jesus states that tithing is a less significant law than mercy and justice. Jesus is not opposed to tithing in this verse. Rather, he is saying it is a less important matter than mercy, justice and devotion to God. Some tithing might very well display mercy, but not the tithe of herbs, which is what Jesus is discussing. Jesus often opposes the oral Torah (Matthew 15:1-15; 23:16-31—opposing the traditions of the “fathers”), but he usually speaks of obeying the “commands” of God instead—the true Torah.
8. Welcoming sinners into the Eschatalogical blessing—
Matthew 9:10-13; 21:21-22 v. Deuteronomy 28:15
The Law makes it clear that those who are under the law but disobey it will die and not receive the blessings of God (Deuteronomy 30:15-20). Jesus, though, is granting God’s kingdom to sinners, and welcoming them through eating with them. However, there is always a place in the Law and prophets for those who regret and repent of their deeds (Deut. 19:1-7; Ezekiel 18; Psalm 51; II Samuel 12). Their repentance displays faith, and so they must be welcomed and forgiven. Forgiveness of sin is not foreign to the Law, even for intentional sins (Genesis 50:17; Exodus 34:7; Numbers 14)—Jesus is just emphasizing forgiveness with an eschatalogical spin. Thus, Jesus is in agreement with Moses.
9. Welcoming Canaanites and Gentiles into the Eschatalogical blessing—
Matthew 8:5-13; 15:21-28 v. Deuteronomy 7:1-2
Jesus supports the welcoming of outsiders into the blessing of God in the kingdom. This seems opposed to the Torah (Exodus 34:24; Leviticus 18:24) on the surface, which does not readily grant the blessings of God to Gentiles. Jesus, however, seems to determine that some Gentiles that display true devotion to God and to the coming King deserve a place with Abraham Isaac and Jacob better than some who live within their earthly realm at present (Matthew 8:5-13). This is not opposing the Torah, but making the shift that Isaiah made, determining that the “nations” is anyone who is opposed or unfaithful to God, while the “servants” are those who are faithful to God (Isaiah 65:8-17; 66:17-23). Jesus is not contradicting Moses, but interpreting those who are “inside” God’s kingdom by the standard of faith.
Jesus does not contradict Moses
Jesus does not oppose the Torah in any way. Often Jesus is seen as doing away with Sabbath and cleansing laws of Moses’ law, but he is not doing so. At times he is prioritizing them, so that if they are in conflict, it can be seen which laws should be obeyed in a certain context. At times he is adjusting them, to make them be interpreted in light of compassion and justice. And at times he is heightening them, so they are to be interpreted in light of God’s higher laws. But never does he just say that this law has no place; nor does he set aside any command.
1. Divorce—
Matthew 19:1-9 v Deuteronomy 24:1
When confronted with Moses’ command to give a certificate of divorce, Jesus claims that the law was a concession to the disloyal hearts of Israelites, and that divorce was never in God’s plan. He uses another part of the Law which confirms that marriage is established by God (Genesis 1:24). Thus, he concludes, divorce should only be allowed if adultery is found—because adultery would break the covenant of marriage even without divorce. While it seems that Jesus is contradicting Moses, on the surface, Jesus is not actually opposing the law, here. The original law was to make a divorce official by having it be written in order to prevent remarriage. Thus the certificate is less about divorce than to disallow remarriage. Thus, Jesus is bringing the law back to its original intent—preventing remarriage, rather than allowing divorce. Jesus then expands the law opposing remarriage in Deuteronomy 24 to include any kind of remarriage except that following adultery, based on Genesis 1. Thus, Jesus is not opposing Moses, but making the law more consistent with itself and God’s plan in creation. The higher law of faithfulness to a covenant and preventing others from sinning trumps the allowance of divorce.
2. Cleanliness—
Matthew 15:10-20 v. Leviticus 5:2
Jesus claims that it is not what one touches or eats that makes one unclean, but the intent of one’s heart. This seems to contradict Moses who says that what one touches can make one unclean. Jesus, however, does not deny the actions that one should do to remain clean in the law—he is not opposed to bathing, but only mandatory washing before meals (which is found in the oral law, not the written). He could be speaking about the “real” cleanness that will matter on the judgement day, not the day to day cleanness that is significant in contemporary human society. Jesus is not contradicting Moses, but highlighting the moral law.
3. Loving enemies—
Matthew 5:42-48 v. Deuteronomy 23:6
The Law tells the Israelites who to hate, while Jesus says to hate no one—to even love one’s enemies. However, the Law is very specific about who one is to hate—Moabites, Amorites and Canaanites. Other nations are not to be “hated” or done evil to, even if they do evil (Edom and Egypt—Deut 23:7). Yahweh rescinded his command about the Canaanites (Deut. 20:17; Judges 2:20-3:6). The separation was later to be not to intermarry with these tribes (Gen. 28:1; Judges 3:5-7;Ezra 9:1-3). The Canaanites survived to the time of Jesus, but he granted them the eschatalogical promise to Israel if they displayed faith (Matthew 15). Thus, Jesus is not contradicting Moses, but taking a basic principle of the law—“Love of neighbor” and applying it more broadly.
4. Oaths—
Matt. 5:34-37; Matthew 23:16-22 v. Numbers 30:3
Rather than just emphasizing the keeping of oaths, Jesus is denying any oath-speech used in a promise. Moses’ law just demands that one keeps the oath one makes. Moses, of course, is not demanding that people make oaths. So Jesus is not contradicting Moses, but heightening the demand. Jesus is emphasizing honest speech for the sake of others in Matthew 5. In Matthew 23, Jesus argues against oath-taking for the sake of devotion. Overall, Jesus is saying that oath-making is less important than integrity and faithfulness to God. Thus, the higher law trumps the allowance of oath-making.
5. Harvesting and preparing food on Sabbath—
Matthew 12:1-8 v. Leviticus 25:4
In Matthew, the disciples are plucking and eating grain as they pass through a field on the Sabbath. Harvesting food is forbidden on the Sabbath, according to the law and Jesus is attacked by the Pharisees for allowing them to do it. Jesus, however, gives a number of examples showing in the Scriptures how one law is contradicted and set aside for a greater one: a. David ate the consecrated bread intended by law only for priests (I Samuel 21:1-6; Leviticus 24: 5-9). Thus, the cultic demand is marginalized due to the need of doing mercy to the King's servant b. The priests do not keep the Sabbath, but do their work during the Sabbath. Thus, the Sabbath command is marginalized by the need to maintain the temple pure. Thus, the disciples are innocent of wrongdoing before God, because although they may have technically broken the Sabbath laws against harvesting and preparing food (Exodus 20:10; 31:14-15), but they were living out the law of mercy for the sake of the ministry to a king— even as David did of old. Again, Jesus is not contradicting Moses, but prioritizing the law in an internal conflict
6. Honoring Father and Mother—
Matthew 8:21-22 v. Exodus 20:12
One should always honor one’s parents, and one kind of honoring is to bury the dead. However, when a potential disciple asks Jesus to bury his father, Jesus refuses him, telling him to let the “dead bury their own dead”. This seems to contradict the command to honor one’s parents. However, Jesus is not contradicting it. First of all, Jesus is prioritizing work for God’s kingdom before participating in honoring one’s parents, just as Jesus prioritizes God’s kingdom work over many other necessary things (Matthew 6:33). On the other hand, burying is not so much a sign of honor, unless there is no one else to bury them. The important thing is that the body gets buried, and not left exposed. As long as someone is burying the body—as Jesus says there is—then no dishonor is there.
7. Tithing—
Matthew 23:22-23 v. Leviticus 27:30
Jesus states that tithing is a less significant law than mercy and justice. Jesus is not opposed to tithing in this verse. Rather, he is saying it is a less important matter than mercy, justice and devotion to God. Some tithing might very well display mercy, but not the tithe of herbs, which is what Jesus is discussing. Jesus often opposes the oral Torah (Matthew 15:1-15; 23:16-31—opposing the traditions of the “fathers”), but he usually speaks of obeying the “commands” of God instead—the true Torah.
8. Welcoming sinners into the Eschatalogical blessing—
Matthew 9:10-13; 21:21-22 v. Deuteronomy 28:15
The Law makes it clear that those who are under the law but disobey it will die and not receive the blessings of God (Deuteronomy 30:15-20). Jesus, though, is granting God’s kingdom to sinners, and welcoming them through eating with them. However, there is always a place in the Law and prophets for those who regret and repent of their deeds (Deut. 19:1-7; Ezekiel 18; Psalm 51; II Samuel 12). Their repentance displays faith, and so they must be welcomed and forgiven. Forgiveness of sin is not foreign to the Law, even for intentional sins (Genesis 50:17; Exodus 34:7; Numbers 14)—Jesus is just emphasizing forgiveness with an eschatalogical spin. Thus, Jesus is in agreement with Moses.
9. Welcoming Canaanites and Gentiles into the Eschatalogical blessing—
Matthew 8:5-13; 15:21-28 v. Deuteronomy 7:1-2
Jesus supports the welcoming of outsiders into the blessing of God in the kingdom. This seems opposed to the Torah (Exodus 34:24; Leviticus 18:24) on the surface, which does not readily grant the blessings of God to Gentiles. Jesus, however, seems to determine that some Gentiles that display true devotion to God and to the coming King deserve a place with Abraham Isaac and Jacob better than some who live within their earthly realm at present (Matthew 8:5-13). This is not opposing the Torah, but making the shift that Isaiah made, determining that the “nations” is anyone who is opposed or unfaithful to God, while the “servants” are those who are faithful to God (Isaiah 65:8-17; 66:17-23). Jesus is not contradicting Moses, but interpreting those who are “inside” God’s kingdom by the standard of faith.
Jesus does not contradict Moses
Jesus does not oppose the Torah in any way. Often Jesus is seen as doing away with Sabbath and cleansing laws of Moses’ law, but he is not doing so. At times he is prioritizing them, so that if they are in conflict, it can be seen which laws should be obeyed in a certain context. At times he is adjusting them, to make them be interpreted in light of compassion and justice. And at times he is heightening them, so they are to be interpreted in light of God’s higher laws. But never does he just say that this law has no place; nor does he set aside any command.
Jesus and the Law (The Law and the NT Part 2)
Jesus never disobeyed the Mosaic Law
Jesus was a fully observant Jew, and obeyed the Law of Moses in all of it’s particulars. Jesus said that he had come to “fulfill” the law (Matthew 5:17-18). Part of the meaning of that is that Jesus did obey the law in all of it’s particulars (see below). And, in fact, he obeyed the law better than Moses or David. Jesus’ opponents were looking to catch Jesus in a sin, but they never did. When they brought him to trial, they accused him of false crimes—things he never did. Jesus even invited them to publicly state what part of God’s word he had broken—but they came up with nothing (John 8:46).
Jesus never taught in opposition to the Mosaic Law
Although it may seem like it at times, Jesus never taught against the Law of Moses. Every one of the cases where it seems that Jesus opposed the law of Moses, he was interpreting it, but not disagreeing with it (see the next tract—“Did Jesus oppose the Law?”) In fact, Jesus said that the one who taught anyone to disobey even the least of God’s commands would be least in God’s kingdom. Jesus himself did not in any way teach anyone to disobey the law of Moses.
Jesus’ view of the Law
1. The Law was given by God and would endure until the beginning of next age
Jesus made it clear that the Law was God’s word, and it is God’s standard. He said that as a standard, it would be protected and stand firm until the next age began. Jesus actually placed the Law of Moses on a similar level with his own words. (Matthew 5:18; Matthew 24:35).
2. The Law was given for God’s people on earth to live in Israel
At the same time, Jesus was saying that the Law of Moses was the law for this age—it would not continue into God’s kingdom. God’s kingdom would see a greater law come about, one based on Jesus’ words.
3. The Law can contradict itself
Jesus showed that different laws within Moses’ law contradicted each other. In Matthew 12, Jesus showed that the sabbath law could contradict the law of love, and that the law for priests can contradict the sabbath law. In these cases, Jesus said, one law was greater than the other, and so the greater law is the one to be followed. Jesus stated that the cultic law was less than the ceremonial law, and the ceremonial law is less than the civic law and the civic law is less than the ethical law.
4. The Law was inadequate for passing God’s judgment
The problem with the law, Jesus felt, is that humans interpret it. The two main schools of thought about the law in Jesus’ day—the Sadducees and the Pharisees—were wrong in their interpretations and obedience of the law. Thus, Jesus said, if one’s obedience of the Law was only up to the standard of the Sadducees and the Pharisees, then one would be judged inadequate by God’s standard. Thus, just having the Law is not enough—one must also have the proper interpretation of it.
Jesus often opposed the traditional interpretation of the Law
There were many cases in which Jesus was confronted with a traditional interpretation of the law. He opposed these interpretations on two bases. He said, first of all, that often the interpretations oppose the true obedience of other commands. For instance, he said that a traditional understanding of surrendering wealth to God (known as “corban”) was in opposition to honoring one’s father and mother with one’s wealth when they needed it in their old age (Mark 7:1-13). Second, Jesus said that requiring all Israel obey their interpretations hurts the needy among them. Jesus said that sacrifice—the obedience to the Temple laws—comes secondary to mercy—obedience to meet the needs of one’s neighbor. Thus, Jesus said, there should be no mandatory imposing of a strict law if it harms the needy (Matthew 12:7). In this way, Jesus opposed many of the requirements that modern Jews (and even Messianic Jews) impose upon their followers based on the Talmud.
Jesus taught submission and disobedience to Pharisee’s authority
On the one hand, Jesus taught that his disciples should recognize that the Pharisees had the authority of Moses, and so they were to be obeyed. Then, immediately after, Jesus described the areas the disciples should disobey the Pharisees. Fundamentally, Jesus taught obedience, except where the teachings or actions of the Pharisees contradicted the higher law of God. (Matthew 23:1-2)
Jesus saw himself as fulfilling the Law
Jesus said, “I did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it.” (Matthew 5:17-18). However, when Matthew uses the word “fulfill”, he means it in three ways in connection with Jesus:
a. Jesus would obey the Mosaic Law to the full extent
As stated above, Jesus was a fully observant Jew, and never disobeyed the law of Moses. Not only did Jesus obey the law that was written down to the letter, but he obeyed the Greater Law that stood behind the Mosaic Law.
b. Jesus would fulfill the paradigms that were only partially fulfilled in the Mosaic Law
All throughout the books of Moses, as well as the rest of the Hebrew Bible, there were many examples of God’s people, but all of them failed in some way. Moses and David were murderers, Aaron participated in idolatry, Abraham was a deceiver and Jacob was greedy. The children of Israel failed God’s law again and again. However, Jesus took Moses’ and David’s place, as well as the nation of Israel as a whole, and he fulfilled all of their roles perfectly, without any fault before God. Thus, Jesus fulfilled every role the Hebrew Bible presents—he was an obedient deliverer, a just judge, a devoted mediator, and a holy nation who endured through testing. Many of the Scriptures that Jesus was fulfilling were not prophecies at all, but simply stories that needed to be completed (see Matthew 2:15 and Hosea 11:1-2).
c. Jesus would fulfill the prophecies that are stated in the Hebrew Bible
Jesus stated many times that the Scripture would be fulfilled in him (for example, Matthew 26:31, 54). By this, he meant that there were many things in the Hebrew Scriptures that God says would happen. However, they had not occurred yet. Jesus said that he himself would be the focus of the completion of these promises.
Jesus taught a higher law
In order to assist us to be fully acceptable and obedient to God, Jesus taught us how to follow the law. He did this by teaching us the greater law by which one would be acceptable on the judgement day. This higher law is: The one who is faithful to God will receive reward from God; The one who is merciful to others will receive mercy from God; The one who is lowered by others will be raised by God; Whatever one repents of will not be held against them. These laws do not replace the law of Moses, but they adequately explain how anyone could obey any law and be right before God. This could be another way in which Jesus fulfills the law: by teaching the true obedience of it.
Jesus blessed Gentiles apart from the Law
There were two times that Jesus was asked by a Gentile to give them the power of the Spirit, which is only offered to the children of Israel (Matthew 8:5-13; 15:21-28; 10:1, 5-6). Jesus provided the blessing of God to them, as they asked—but only because of the faith they had shown. But either before or after this, Jesus made no requirements that they follow the law of Moses, and there was no expectation that they would, especially for one. Thus, Jesus showed that the blessing of God could be given to non-Jews, even though they did not follow Moses’ law.
The Law is good, but Jesus’ higher law is better.
Jesus was a fully observant Jew, and obeyed the Law of Moses in all of it’s particulars. Jesus said that he had come to “fulfill” the law (Matthew 5:17-18). Part of the meaning of that is that Jesus did obey the law in all of it’s particulars (see below). And, in fact, he obeyed the law better than Moses or David. Jesus’ opponents were looking to catch Jesus in a sin, but they never did. When they brought him to trial, they accused him of false crimes—things he never did. Jesus even invited them to publicly state what part of God’s word he had broken—but they came up with nothing (John 8:46).
Jesus never taught in opposition to the Mosaic Law
Although it may seem like it at times, Jesus never taught against the Law of Moses. Every one of the cases where it seems that Jesus opposed the law of Moses, he was interpreting it, but not disagreeing with it (see the next tract—“Did Jesus oppose the Law?”) In fact, Jesus said that the one who taught anyone to disobey even the least of God’s commands would be least in God’s kingdom. Jesus himself did not in any way teach anyone to disobey the law of Moses.
Jesus’ view of the Law
1. The Law was given by God and would endure until the beginning of next age
Jesus made it clear that the Law was God’s word, and it is God’s standard. He said that as a standard, it would be protected and stand firm until the next age began. Jesus actually placed the Law of Moses on a similar level with his own words. (Matthew 5:18; Matthew 24:35).
2. The Law was given for God’s people on earth to live in Israel
At the same time, Jesus was saying that the Law of Moses was the law for this age—it would not continue into God’s kingdom. God’s kingdom would see a greater law come about, one based on Jesus’ words.
3. The Law can contradict itself
Jesus showed that different laws within Moses’ law contradicted each other. In Matthew 12, Jesus showed that the sabbath law could contradict the law of love, and that the law for priests can contradict the sabbath law. In these cases, Jesus said, one law was greater than the other, and so the greater law is the one to be followed. Jesus stated that the cultic law was less than the ceremonial law, and the ceremonial law is less than the civic law and the civic law is less than the ethical law.
4. The Law was inadequate for passing God’s judgment
The problem with the law, Jesus felt, is that humans interpret it. The two main schools of thought about the law in Jesus’ day—the Sadducees and the Pharisees—were wrong in their interpretations and obedience of the law. Thus, Jesus said, if one’s obedience of the Law was only up to the standard of the Sadducees and the Pharisees, then one would be judged inadequate by God’s standard. Thus, just having the Law is not enough—one must also have the proper interpretation of it.
Jesus often opposed the traditional interpretation of the Law
There were many cases in which Jesus was confronted with a traditional interpretation of the law. He opposed these interpretations on two bases. He said, first of all, that often the interpretations oppose the true obedience of other commands. For instance, he said that a traditional understanding of surrendering wealth to God (known as “corban”) was in opposition to honoring one’s father and mother with one’s wealth when they needed it in their old age (Mark 7:1-13). Second, Jesus said that requiring all Israel obey their interpretations hurts the needy among them. Jesus said that sacrifice—the obedience to the Temple laws—comes secondary to mercy—obedience to meet the needs of one’s neighbor. Thus, Jesus said, there should be no mandatory imposing of a strict law if it harms the needy (Matthew 12:7). In this way, Jesus opposed many of the requirements that modern Jews (and even Messianic Jews) impose upon their followers based on the Talmud.
Jesus taught submission and disobedience to Pharisee’s authority
On the one hand, Jesus taught that his disciples should recognize that the Pharisees had the authority of Moses, and so they were to be obeyed. Then, immediately after, Jesus described the areas the disciples should disobey the Pharisees. Fundamentally, Jesus taught obedience, except where the teachings or actions of the Pharisees contradicted the higher law of God. (Matthew 23:1-2)
Jesus saw himself as fulfilling the Law
Jesus said, “I did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it.” (Matthew 5:17-18). However, when Matthew uses the word “fulfill”, he means it in three ways in connection with Jesus:
a. Jesus would obey the Mosaic Law to the full extent
As stated above, Jesus was a fully observant Jew, and never disobeyed the law of Moses. Not only did Jesus obey the law that was written down to the letter, but he obeyed the Greater Law that stood behind the Mosaic Law.
b. Jesus would fulfill the paradigms that were only partially fulfilled in the Mosaic Law
All throughout the books of Moses, as well as the rest of the Hebrew Bible, there were many examples of God’s people, but all of them failed in some way. Moses and David were murderers, Aaron participated in idolatry, Abraham was a deceiver and Jacob was greedy. The children of Israel failed God’s law again and again. However, Jesus took Moses’ and David’s place, as well as the nation of Israel as a whole, and he fulfilled all of their roles perfectly, without any fault before God. Thus, Jesus fulfilled every role the Hebrew Bible presents—he was an obedient deliverer, a just judge, a devoted mediator, and a holy nation who endured through testing. Many of the Scriptures that Jesus was fulfilling were not prophecies at all, but simply stories that needed to be completed (see Matthew 2:15 and Hosea 11:1-2).
c. Jesus would fulfill the prophecies that are stated in the Hebrew Bible
Jesus stated many times that the Scripture would be fulfilled in him (for example, Matthew 26:31, 54). By this, he meant that there were many things in the Hebrew Scriptures that God says would happen. However, they had not occurred yet. Jesus said that he himself would be the focus of the completion of these promises.
Jesus taught a higher law
In order to assist us to be fully acceptable and obedient to God, Jesus taught us how to follow the law. He did this by teaching us the greater law by which one would be acceptable on the judgement day. This higher law is: The one who is faithful to God will receive reward from God; The one who is merciful to others will receive mercy from God; The one who is lowered by others will be raised by God; Whatever one repents of will not be held against them. These laws do not replace the law of Moses, but they adequately explain how anyone could obey any law and be right before God. This could be another way in which Jesus fulfills the law: by teaching the true obedience of it.
Jesus blessed Gentiles apart from the Law
There were two times that Jesus was asked by a Gentile to give them the power of the Spirit, which is only offered to the children of Israel (Matthew 8:5-13; 15:21-28; 10:1, 5-6). Jesus provided the blessing of God to them, as they asked—but only because of the faith they had shown. But either before or after this, Jesus made no requirements that they follow the law of Moses, and there was no expectation that they would, especially for one. Thus, Jesus showed that the blessing of God could be given to non-Jews, even though they did not follow Moses’ law.
The Law is good, but Jesus’ higher law is better.
What Is the Law? (The Law and the NT Part 1)
The “Law” is a portion of the Hebrew Bible
In both the New and the Old Testaments of the Bible, the word “law” is used as a title for God’s word that he revealed to Israel. Sometimes “the law” is speaking about the whole of the OT, and sometimes it is only used as a portion of it, such as when it is used in the phrase, “the law, the prophets and the psalms” (Luke 24:44). Often the Law (or in Hebrew, Torah) is used to speak of the first five books of the Bible, also called the “books of Moses” (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy). When Jesus speaks of the Law, he is usually speaking of these books.
The Mosaic Law is the instructional material of the Hebrew Bible
The Law is also used to speak of certain kinds of writings in the Hebrew Bible. Specifically, it describes the commands and ethical stories of the first five books of the Bible. In this sense, the “Law” is the commands of God, given through Moses. When Paul speaks of the “law”, he is usually speaking of these commands. There are more than six hundred legal commands given to Israel in the books of Moses. Modern Judaism, when it speaks of the “Torah”, would also include their book of interpretations of the Mosaic Law, which is called the Talmud.
The Mosaic Law contain many kinds of commands.
a. Cultic Laws—These laws have to do with the priesthood, sacrifices and the Temple. These laws are no longer able to be obeyed because there has been no recognized Temple or priesthood since the Temple was destroyed in 70AD.
If the anointed priest sins so as to bring guilt on the people, then let him offer to the LORD a bull without defect as a sin offering for the sin he has committed. Leviticus 4:3
The high priest shall not enter at any time into the holy place inside the veil, before the mercy seat which is on the ark, or he will die; for I will appear in the cloud over the mercy seat. Leviticus 16:2
b. Cleansing Laws—These laws have to do with cleanliness laws and community acceptability. Some have to do with hygine and others with acceptable food, but those who violate these commands will be separated from the community and from the Temple.
If a person touches any unclean thing, whether a carcass of an unclean beast or the carcass of unclean cattle or a carcass of unclean swarming things, though it is hidden from him and he is unclean, then he will be guilty. Leviticus 5:2
If a woman has a discharge of her blood many days, not at the period of her menstrual impurity, or if she has a discharge beyond that period, all the days of her impure discharge she shall continue as though in her menstrual impurity; she is unclean. Leviticus 15:25
c. Ceremonial Laws—These laws have to do with feasts, memorials, months and Sabbaths. They command the people of Israel what days are set aside to rest and to celebrate before the Lord.
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Exodus 20:8
This month shall be the beginning of months for you; it is to be the first month of the year to you… The tenth of this month they are each one to take a lamb for themselves, according to their fathers' households, a lamb for each household… It is the LORD'S Passover. Exodus 12:2-3, 11
Three times a year you shall celebrate a feast to Me. Exodus 23:14
d. Civil Laws—These laws have to do with practical concerns of justice. They are the kind of laws that were common in every legal code throughout the Ancient Near East in Moses’ day. They mostly speak of what are legal wrongs that need to be sentenced by a judge.
If a man steals an ox or a sheep and slaughters it or sells it, he shall pay five oxen for the ox and four sheep for the sheep. Exodus 22:1
You shall not curse God, nor curse a ruler of your people. Exodus 22:28
e. Ethical Laws—These laws have to do with underlying principles of moral goodness. Rather than speak to a specific wrong, they speak of general principles that other laws are based on.
You shall have no other gods before Me. Exodus 20:3
You shall love the Lord your God. Deuteronomy 6:5
You shall love your neighbor as yourself. Leviticus 19:23
The Mosaic law is impossible to obey today in every specific.
Many of the laws of Moses have to do with priests and a temple or tabernacle that no longer exist. And other laws have to do with peoples—such as Cannanites or Moabites—that no longer exist. Thus, the Mosaic Law, as a whole, no longer is able to be obeyed to the letter. Those who claim to obey the Mosaic Law are only obeying a part of it that they chose, or an interpretation of it, which changes what it literally says. There is no one today who can truthfully say that they obey the Mosaic Law in all of its specifics.
What are the Prophets?
The Prophets in Ancient Judaism are the “historical” books of the Old Testament of Joshua through Nehemiah and the “prophetic” books of Isaiah through Micah. These books apply the law to different circumstances and interpret the law within those circumstances. These explanations are a new part of God’s command.
There are greater and lesser commands in the Law
One thing that the prophets make clear is that there are greater and lesser parts to the Law. For instance, in Isaiah 1, the people’s obedience to the ceremonial and cultic laws are rejected because they failed to obey the civil law. If justice is not found in Israel, then one’s obedience to the other laws are of no use to be acceptable to God. The prophets also say that sacrifice is no use if there is no devotion to God or compassion for other’s needs. (Hosea 6:6).
There have been many schools of the Mosaic Law
Throughout history, and today, there are different ways to understand and apply the Mosaic Law. In Jesus’ day, it was said, that there were four main schools of thought about how to interpret Moses’ law—but there were many more beyond that even then. One of those schools of thought over time became Rabbinic Judaism that is the basis for the varieties of Judaism that we have today. Another school of interpretation was started by Jesus and was interpreted by the early church to become Jewish and Gentile Christianities. And throughout the last two thousand years quite a variety of thought about the Law has occurred. But any Christian understanding of the Law needs to be based on the teaching of Jesus and the apostolic teachings of the New Testament.
In both the New and the Old Testaments of the Bible, the word “law” is used as a title for God’s word that he revealed to Israel. Sometimes “the law” is speaking about the whole of the OT, and sometimes it is only used as a portion of it, such as when it is used in the phrase, “the law, the prophets and the psalms” (Luke 24:44). Often the Law (or in Hebrew, Torah) is used to speak of the first five books of the Bible, also called the “books of Moses” (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy). When Jesus speaks of the Law, he is usually speaking of these books.
The Mosaic Law is the instructional material of the Hebrew Bible
The Law is also used to speak of certain kinds of writings in the Hebrew Bible. Specifically, it describes the commands and ethical stories of the first five books of the Bible. In this sense, the “Law” is the commands of God, given through Moses. When Paul speaks of the “law”, he is usually speaking of these commands. There are more than six hundred legal commands given to Israel in the books of Moses. Modern Judaism, when it speaks of the “Torah”, would also include their book of interpretations of the Mosaic Law, which is called the Talmud.
The Mosaic Law contain many kinds of commands.
a. Cultic Laws—These laws have to do with the priesthood, sacrifices and the Temple. These laws are no longer able to be obeyed because there has been no recognized Temple or priesthood since the Temple was destroyed in 70AD.
If the anointed priest sins so as to bring guilt on the people, then let him offer to the LORD a bull without defect as a sin offering for the sin he has committed. Leviticus 4:3
The high priest shall not enter at any time into the holy place inside the veil, before the mercy seat which is on the ark, or he will die; for I will appear in the cloud over the mercy seat. Leviticus 16:2
b. Cleansing Laws—These laws have to do with cleanliness laws and community acceptability. Some have to do with hygine and others with acceptable food, but those who violate these commands will be separated from the community and from the Temple.
If a person touches any unclean thing, whether a carcass of an unclean beast or the carcass of unclean cattle or a carcass of unclean swarming things, though it is hidden from him and he is unclean, then he will be guilty. Leviticus 5:2
If a woman has a discharge of her blood many days, not at the period of her menstrual impurity, or if she has a discharge beyond that period, all the days of her impure discharge she shall continue as though in her menstrual impurity; she is unclean. Leviticus 15:25
c. Ceremonial Laws—These laws have to do with feasts, memorials, months and Sabbaths. They command the people of Israel what days are set aside to rest and to celebrate before the Lord.
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Exodus 20:8
This month shall be the beginning of months for you; it is to be the first month of the year to you… The tenth of this month they are each one to take a lamb for themselves, according to their fathers' households, a lamb for each household… It is the LORD'S Passover. Exodus 12:2-3, 11
Three times a year you shall celebrate a feast to Me. Exodus 23:14
d. Civil Laws—These laws have to do with practical concerns of justice. They are the kind of laws that were common in every legal code throughout the Ancient Near East in Moses’ day. They mostly speak of what are legal wrongs that need to be sentenced by a judge.
If a man steals an ox or a sheep and slaughters it or sells it, he shall pay five oxen for the ox and four sheep for the sheep. Exodus 22:1
You shall not curse God, nor curse a ruler of your people. Exodus 22:28
e. Ethical Laws—These laws have to do with underlying principles of moral goodness. Rather than speak to a specific wrong, they speak of general principles that other laws are based on.
You shall have no other gods before Me. Exodus 20:3
You shall love the Lord your God. Deuteronomy 6:5
You shall love your neighbor as yourself. Leviticus 19:23
The Mosaic law is impossible to obey today in every specific.
Many of the laws of Moses have to do with priests and a temple or tabernacle that no longer exist. And other laws have to do with peoples—such as Cannanites or Moabites—that no longer exist. Thus, the Mosaic Law, as a whole, no longer is able to be obeyed to the letter. Those who claim to obey the Mosaic Law are only obeying a part of it that they chose, or an interpretation of it, which changes what it literally says. There is no one today who can truthfully say that they obey the Mosaic Law in all of its specifics.
What are the Prophets?
The Prophets in Ancient Judaism are the “historical” books of the Old Testament of Joshua through Nehemiah and the “prophetic” books of Isaiah through Micah. These books apply the law to different circumstances and interpret the law within those circumstances. These explanations are a new part of God’s command.
There are greater and lesser commands in the Law
One thing that the prophets make clear is that there are greater and lesser parts to the Law. For instance, in Isaiah 1, the people’s obedience to the ceremonial and cultic laws are rejected because they failed to obey the civil law. If justice is not found in Israel, then one’s obedience to the other laws are of no use to be acceptable to God. The prophets also say that sacrifice is no use if there is no devotion to God or compassion for other’s needs. (Hosea 6:6).
There have been many schools of the Mosaic Law
Throughout history, and today, there are different ways to understand and apply the Mosaic Law. In Jesus’ day, it was said, that there were four main schools of thought about how to interpret Moses’ law—but there were many more beyond that even then. One of those schools of thought over time became Rabbinic Judaism that is the basis for the varieties of Judaism that we have today. Another school of interpretation was started by Jesus and was interpreted by the early church to become Jewish and Gentile Christianities. And throughout the last two thousand years quite a variety of thought about the Law has occurred. But any Christian understanding of the Law needs to be based on the teaching of Jesus and the apostolic teachings of the New Testament.
Is Jesus The Only Way to Heaven?
This question is usually asked by Christians who are having a hard time believing that most people in the world are going to hell, or they can’t accept the arrogance of the statement that Jesus could possibly be the only way. In our world of pluralism and multiple truths, it just doesn’t seem socially polite to evangelize or to insist that Jesus is IT.
There is also the idea that all religions basically teach the same thing. If by that one means that they all teach “do unto others as you would have them do to you”, that is basically right. Most philosophies and religions teach that moral principle. But does this mean that they are the same in all aspects of their religion?
But we have to realize that if we say that Jesus is one of many ways to heaven, then we are not only putting words in Jesus’ mouth, but also in the mouths’ of all other religions and belief systems. This is assuming that all other belief systems want to be right with God, or that they want to go to heaven. To know this, we have to not just guess at what they want, but we have to look at it.
Now I would recommend each one of us looking at the major religions themselves and finding out what each one says is the salvation they are looking for and how to get there. But, honestly, I doubt many of us would even take the effort to look up Islam, Hinduism, etc on Wikipedia to read each article, let alone reading each holy book or the philosophy of the thousand forms of beliefs. So, to make it easy, I have listed a number of significant worldviews below, their main goals and a general statement of the means to reach that goal. If you belong to one of these belief systems, I apologize for my brevity, but this IS a short tract.
Jesus’ goals – forgiveness, the Holy Spirit, security on judgment day, preparation for living in God’s future utopia
Jesus’ means—a life of trust, dependence and faithfulness to God, setting aside that which would be good for you in this life
Buddha’s goal—To escape the endless cycle of recurring death and suffering
Buddha’s means—Separation from desire through various disciplines
Hinduism’s goals—To live at peace with the spirit world; to release oneself from the system of karma
Hinduism’s means—To live part of one’s life as detached from the world, in accordance to the basic rules of life.
Islam’s goals—To live among God’s people in submission to God; to live among God’s people in paradise after one dies.
Isalm’s means—To establish communities in submission to God in which his people can live and thrive.
Judaism’s goals—To live as a people chosen by God, separated to Him; to hasten the coming of God to earth.
Judaism’s means—To live according to the Torah, as understood by the rabbis.
Psychoanalysis’ goal—To live a life that is contented and at peace.
Psychoanalysis’ means—Therapy toward living a self-actualized life
The American Dream—To live a life of comfort, security and health in this life.
The American means—To have education, a good job and a secure government.
The moralist’s goals (e.g. Henry David Thourau)-- To live life at peace with oneself, others and creation.
The moralist’s means—To do well to all things, so they will do well to you.
The scientist’s goals—To discover all that the human mind can discover on its own.
The scientist’s means—Discovery by objective, repeatable experiments.
Christianity’s goals—To have our sins forgiven; to live in heaven after we die.
Christianity’s means—To believe in Jesus and to live with Jesus’ people.
Here are some observations I have made in looking at these, and other, belief systems:
1. Looking at these different paths, we can see that they don’t all go to the same place. Some want a better life now, some want a better life later, some want to be a people, some want to be individuals. If they don’t have the same goals, how could we expect them to have the same goals?
2. We can also see that they have radically different means. This only makes sense, if they have different goals. If one wants to be detached, it makes sense to surrender all desire for things. But if one desires to live with God, then one must be faithful or submitted to God.
3. Jesus’ path is unique. First of all, it is counter-intuitive. He insisted that suffering is necessary to obtain peace in the long run, for in this way God would see our sorry state and give us what we do not have. All other ways basically are insisting that whatever life you pursue, that is what you will obtain. Jesus doesn’t disagree with this (he who lives by the sword will die by the sword”), but he says that if one wants to obtain God’s fullest, best blessing, in this life and the next, one must surrender oneself now. To lose is to win. This is unique, and unheard of among religions and philosophies.
4. Interestingly enough, in both goals and means the closest pair is Jesus’ way and Islam. Muslims, in looking clear-eyed at Jesus, often says, “This is too hard, and unnecessarily so, as well!” But this is the disagreement between Muhammad and Jesus. Muhammad sought a middle way, such as the medieval Roman church, a way easy enough to include everyone who chose or were born into their society. Jesus, however, made it clear that the way to God’s fullest blessing isn’t easy, nor could be. The goals are similar, but the means of obtaining these goals are different. So this is a basic question of who is right—Muhammad or Jesus? From this Christian’s perspective, it is only Jesus who was resurrected from the dead…
5. One might note that I placed Christianity and Jesus in separate categories. For the most part, most Christians agree with the Muslims that Jesus’ stated way is too difficult. So they build communities, nationalities, theologies and philosophies that transform Jesus’ gospel into something more palatable. Perhaps they claim that his salvation is simply “going to heaven” instead of being resurrected into the kingdom of God. Perhaps they see the means of salvation as “easy believism” or simple acceptance of a church’s teachings instead of Jesus’ way of life. But this is the reason that Jesus said—and continues to say—that the way to life is narrow, despite that there are more Christians in the world today than any other belief system. Because, ultimately, even Christians have a hard time believing what Jesus said.
What is the answer?
If you are looking for the salvation that Jesus’ offers—An escape from karma through God’s grace
The Holy Spirit—God himself—to assist current living
A good life in God’s kingdom
-- Then Jesus is the only means to obtain that salvation.
If you want something else—
A good life in the here-and-now;
A way of escaping reincarnation;
A general spirituality without a real life in God
-- Then perhaps Jesus isn’t the one you are looking for.
There is also the idea that all religions basically teach the same thing. If by that one means that they all teach “do unto others as you would have them do to you”, that is basically right. Most philosophies and religions teach that moral principle. But does this mean that they are the same in all aspects of their religion?
But we have to realize that if we say that Jesus is one of many ways to heaven, then we are not only putting words in Jesus’ mouth, but also in the mouths’ of all other religions and belief systems. This is assuming that all other belief systems want to be right with God, or that they want to go to heaven. To know this, we have to not just guess at what they want, but we have to look at it.
Now I would recommend each one of us looking at the major religions themselves and finding out what each one says is the salvation they are looking for and how to get there. But, honestly, I doubt many of us would even take the effort to look up Islam, Hinduism, etc on Wikipedia to read each article, let alone reading each holy book or the philosophy of the thousand forms of beliefs. So, to make it easy, I have listed a number of significant worldviews below, their main goals and a general statement of the means to reach that goal. If you belong to one of these belief systems, I apologize for my brevity, but this IS a short tract.
Jesus’ goals – forgiveness, the Holy Spirit, security on judgment day, preparation for living in God’s future utopia
Jesus’ means—a life of trust, dependence and faithfulness to God, setting aside that which would be good for you in this life
Buddha’s goal—To escape the endless cycle of recurring death and suffering
Buddha’s means—Separation from desire through various disciplines
Hinduism’s goals—To live at peace with the spirit world; to release oneself from the system of karma
Hinduism’s means—To live part of one’s life as detached from the world, in accordance to the basic rules of life.
Islam’s goals—To live among God’s people in submission to God; to live among God’s people in paradise after one dies.
Isalm’s means—To establish communities in submission to God in which his people can live and thrive.
Judaism’s goals—To live as a people chosen by God, separated to Him; to hasten the coming of God to earth.
Judaism’s means—To live according to the Torah, as understood by the rabbis.
Psychoanalysis’ goal—To live a life that is contented and at peace.
Psychoanalysis’ means—Therapy toward living a self-actualized life
The American Dream—To live a life of comfort, security and health in this life.
The American means—To have education, a good job and a secure government.
The moralist’s goals (e.g. Henry David Thourau)-- To live life at peace with oneself, others and creation.
The moralist’s means—To do well to all things, so they will do well to you.
The scientist’s goals—To discover all that the human mind can discover on its own.
The scientist’s means—Discovery by objective, repeatable experiments.
Christianity’s goals—To have our sins forgiven; to live in heaven after we die.
Christianity’s means—To believe in Jesus and to live with Jesus’ people.
Here are some observations I have made in looking at these, and other, belief systems:
1. Looking at these different paths, we can see that they don’t all go to the same place. Some want a better life now, some want a better life later, some want to be a people, some want to be individuals. If they don’t have the same goals, how could we expect them to have the same goals?
2. We can also see that they have radically different means. This only makes sense, if they have different goals. If one wants to be detached, it makes sense to surrender all desire for things. But if one desires to live with God, then one must be faithful or submitted to God.
3. Jesus’ path is unique. First of all, it is counter-intuitive. He insisted that suffering is necessary to obtain peace in the long run, for in this way God would see our sorry state and give us what we do not have. All other ways basically are insisting that whatever life you pursue, that is what you will obtain. Jesus doesn’t disagree with this (he who lives by the sword will die by the sword”), but he says that if one wants to obtain God’s fullest, best blessing, in this life and the next, one must surrender oneself now. To lose is to win. This is unique, and unheard of among religions and philosophies.
4. Interestingly enough, in both goals and means the closest pair is Jesus’ way and Islam. Muslims, in looking clear-eyed at Jesus, often says, “This is too hard, and unnecessarily so, as well!” But this is the disagreement between Muhammad and Jesus. Muhammad sought a middle way, such as the medieval Roman church, a way easy enough to include everyone who chose or were born into their society. Jesus, however, made it clear that the way to God’s fullest blessing isn’t easy, nor could be. The goals are similar, but the means of obtaining these goals are different. So this is a basic question of who is right—Muhammad or Jesus? From this Christian’s perspective, it is only Jesus who was resurrected from the dead…
5. One might note that I placed Christianity and Jesus in separate categories. For the most part, most Christians agree with the Muslims that Jesus’ stated way is too difficult. So they build communities, nationalities, theologies and philosophies that transform Jesus’ gospel into something more palatable. Perhaps they claim that his salvation is simply “going to heaven” instead of being resurrected into the kingdom of God. Perhaps they see the means of salvation as “easy believism” or simple acceptance of a church’s teachings instead of Jesus’ way of life. But this is the reason that Jesus said—and continues to say—that the way to life is narrow, despite that there are more Christians in the world today than any other belief system. Because, ultimately, even Christians have a hard time believing what Jesus said.
What is the answer?
If you are looking for the salvation that Jesus’ offers—An escape from karma through God’s grace
The Holy Spirit—God himself—to assist current living
A good life in God’s kingdom
-- Then Jesus is the only means to obtain that salvation.
If you want something else—
A good life in the here-and-now;
A way of escaping reincarnation;
A general spirituality without a real life in God
-- Then perhaps Jesus isn’t the one you are looking for.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)