Why did Christians give up their Jewish roots?

[Gman]

Hi guys... I would like to open a discussion on exactly why did we Christians give up certain Jewish customs such as practicing the Jewish feasts (Passover, Sukkot, etc.) and or wearing the tallit as commanded in Numbers 15:37-41 and Deuteronomy 22:12?

So far no one has given me a good answer for rejecting these customs..

Thanks.

[B. W.]

Hi guys... I would like to open a discussion on exactly why did we Christians give up certain Jewish customs such as practicing the Jewish feasts (Passover, Sukkot, etc.) and or wearing the tallit as commanded in Numbers 15:37-41 and Deuteronomy 22:12?

So far no one has given me a good answer for rejecting these customs..

Thanks.

I think it was due to Jesus' denouncement of Pharisees and Paul's warning going back found in his writings such as:

Mat 23:5, "But all their works they do to be seen by men. They make their phylacteries broad and enlarge the borders of their garments."NKJV


Gal 4:9, 10, 11, 21, 24, 25c “But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage? 10 You observe days and months and seasons and years. 11 I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain… 21 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law?... 24 which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar—25 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children—” NKJV

Col 2:16, 17, “So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbaths, 17 which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ…” NKJV

Add to this the Pharisee persecution of the early-early Church up till 70AD and you can see why such things had a lot to do with rejecting these customs…
-
-
-

[jlay]

I don't reject any Jewish custom. The question is, is it mine or yours to keep?

As we see in Jesus' earthly ministry, He taught Jews and with a distinctly Jewish message. Same goes for the early Apostolic church. Jesus kept all these things. And not once did He say for people (The Jews) not to. So, what changed?

As BW quoted in Col. those were mere shadows of what to come in Christ. In Christ is the fullness of all these things. This was a great struggle amongst the early Jewish believers and is a primary reason we have the book of Hebrews. Perhaps I can find a great piece on the festivals and how they forshadow Christ Himself. They are definately profitable for us to study, but not for us to keep. Not as Gentile believers.

No, they were for Israel, for a specific covenant, in a specific dispensation. This covenant regulated everything from ethics, to food, to farming, to clothing. So, one can't pluck out something regarding clothing yet neglect issues regarding food. That is not how the Law works. (James 2:10)

Read Acts 15

Up until about 70 AD the church was still essentially Jewish. Once the temple was destroyed, the church scattered. All of these customs were tied to the earthly Kingdom through Israel. The temple and the city were at the heart of this. This is where the feast were celebrated. Tied into each of these was also the act of sacrifice. No temple, no priesthood, no sacrifice. But Israel now has a High Priest who was also THE sacrifice. Nothing is any longer bound to geography, a levitical priesthood, or the Law.

[Katabole]

Hi G.

I don't believe all Christians gave up their roots. As you know, Jesus claims that he did not come to destroy the law:

Matt 5:17 (KJV) Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

The word law as used in some Christian schools of thought seems to relate to the Old Testament as a whole. But we know the Old Testament is composed of different parts. Some are laws. Others are judgments, ordinances and statutes (commandments).

From what I understand the ordinances may also be defined as the ceremonial aspects of the law. For example, animal sacrifice, circumcision and what you mentioned, as to wearing the tallit.

So as far as I know, the ceremonial aspects of the law (the ordinances) are done away with, as said by Paul in Colossians:

Col 2:14 (KJV) Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

The non-ceremonial aspects of the law, I believe, are still valid. They include the judgments and commandments. This is I believe, the law that Christ mentions in Matt 5:17. That would be the laws against murder, theft, worshipping other gods, etc.

We also know Christ magnified the law. There is the Old Testament law on adultery, which required both man and woman to be put to death if found guilty. But Jesus claims, if a man lusts after a woman in his heart (mind), he is guilty of adultery. Thus a magnification of an old law into a new. Christ takes a law from the purely physical realm and magnifies it to a law in one's mind.

As for the Sabbath, again, breaking the Old Testament Sabbath law would have resulted in the perpetrator being executed. But in the New Testament Paul exemplifies what Christ did on the cross when he says that Christ became our Sabbath (rest) in Heb 4:8,9 (KJV) and as BW quoted from Col 2:16,17 (KJV). So personally speaking, I do not take one day of the week to celebrate the Sabbath. As a Christian, I celebrate the Sabbath every day. The Israelites worshipped God on the Sabbath day. As Christians we should worship God every day and not just make it a ritual day of the week, for Christ became our rest. There is also a difference between the High Sabbath and the weekly Sabbath.

As for the Israelite feasts, the church I am a member of, celebrates Passover, Pentecost and the feast of Tabernacles. We don't celebrate Easter, and Christmas is celebrated during the feast of Tabernacles, for that is when we believe Christ was born. We only celebrate those three because we believe the other feasts belong to the ceremonial parts of the law, which as I stated above have been done away with on the cross of Christ.

Granted, I do not believe that holding to the ceremonial laws will affect a person's salvation. As long as we hold true to John 3:16 (KJV), believers will attain that salvation eventually.

As for why have they been rejected? I agree with BW. The Pharisee peresecution of the early church.

[RickD]

Hi guys... I would like to open a discussion on exactly why did we Christians give up certain Jewish customs such as practicing the Jewish feasts (Passover, Sukkot, etc.) and or wearing the tallit as commanded in Numbers 15:37-41 and Deuteronomy 22:12?

So far no one has given me a good answer for rejecting these customs..

Thanks.

I'm guessing you're asking why the early Christians gave up certain Jewish customs. Your question seems to be worded as to ask why we as Christians today don't follow Jewish customs. I don't think you really believe we as Christians should follow Jewish customs, and Jewish law. It may confuse people with the way you worded the question.

[Seraph]

Some Jewish customs would be cool to still celebrate, others I'm relieved that they were intended only for ancient Isreal.

[Christian2]

Hi guys... I would like to open a discussion on exactly why did we Christians give up certain Jewish customs such as practicing the Jewish feasts (Passover, Sukkot, etc.) and or wearing the tallit as commanded in Numbers 15:37-41 and Deuteronomy 22:12?

So far no one has given me a good answer for rejecting these customs..

Thanks.

I don't believe Messianic Jews/Christians did give them up.

But, remember Gentile Christians are not under laws specifically meant for Jews.

[jlay]

Gentiles never had The Law unless they were prosylites. They were alienated from God. (Eph 2:12) Remember that at that time you (Gentiles) were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world.

He goes on to say, "by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace." Eph 2:15
Either the law with its commandments and regulations are abolished or they are not. There is either a conflict with Paul, with what Jesus taught in Matt., or something has dramatically changed. A Gentile believer is not to take Jesus' teaching and try to reconcile it to Paul's. There is a difference in what is going on, and for who. You simply can not reconcile these two thoughts by saying, well some of it still applies and some doesn't. Although that appears to be the method most employ today. A common reaction is, "are you saying it is OK to murder?" No. It didn't become wrong to murder when the commandments were given. It was wrong from the first murder, and is still wrong. Either the law is abolished or it is not. You can't have it both ways. In all of my study on this matter there is only one theological position that is able to reconcile this matter. We can pretend it doesn't exist. We can try and force our own theology on to it. But the conflict is still there in these cases.

No one explains this stuff better than Paul. All of Col. 2 is great.

[Canuckster1127]

There was a great deal of debate and struggle within the early church as to whether Gentile "Christ Followers" were required to become "Jewish". Paul's Ministry and the early rise of the church at Antioch very early on eclipsed the main church at Jerusalem. James the Brother of Jesus was commonly seen as the leader at the church of Jerusalem and he somewhat sanctioned to some degree those Jewish Believers who championed Jewish tradition, dietary laws and even pushed maintaining separation from Gentiles (even Gentile Believers who had not been circumcised and accepted Jewish rites.) This was the point of the Jeresualm Coucil in Acts 15 as has been noted and the main church compromised on the issue (although Judiazers still pursued it and sent their own missionaries to churches planted by Paul after he left.)

As the gentile church grew, Paul became more and more the recognized leader of the Gentile churches and about 49 BC, about the time Galatians was written (which was a response against these Judiazers and even Peter who allowed himself to be influenced by them) that combined with the financial need of the Church in Jerusalem (which was severe) and their reliance upon many of the gifts Paul raised on their behalf among gentile churches, caused the balance of power and influence to shift toward Gentile dominanace. The fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 sealed it.

[Gman]

I think it was due to Jesus' denouncement of Pharisees and Paul's warning going back found in his writings such as:

Mat 23:5, "But all their works they do to be seen by men. They make their phylacteries broad and enlarge the borders of their garments."NKJV

Hmmm.. But that is about enlarging your garments. Not about getting rid of your garments altogether.

Gal 4:9, 10, 11, 21, 24, 25c “But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage? 10 You observe days and months and seasons and years. 11 I am afraid for you, lest I have labored for you in vain… 21 Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law?... 24 which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar—25 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children—” NKJV

Yes but it is not being specific as to what these elements were. As for being symbolic I would agree with that, but it doesn't seem to be either granting one a special status. Especially when it comes to salvation.

Col 2:16, 17, “So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or Sabbaths, 17 which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ…” NKJV

Let no non-believer judge you when you celebrate the Jewish festivals which are a shadow of Christ? It could be taken that way too..

Add to this the Pharisee persecution of the early-early Church up till 70AD and you can see why such things had a lot to do with rejecting these customs…

Yes I can see that... Thanks Bryan.

[Gman]

As for the Israelite feasts, the church I am a member of, celebrates Passover, Pentecost and the feast of Tabernacles. We don't celebrate Easter, and Christmas is celebrated during the feast of Tabernacles, for that is when we believe Christ was born. We only celebrate those three because we believe the other feasts belong to the ceremonial parts of the law, which as I stated above have been done away with on the cross of Christ.

Katabole, can I ask which church you attend?

Granted, I do not believe that holding to the ceremonial laws will affect a person's salvation. As long as we hold true to John 3:16 (KJV), believers will attain that salvation eventually.

Absolutely..

[Gman]

No, they were for Israel, for a specific covenant, in a specific dispensation. This covenant regulated everything from ethics, to food, to farming, to clothing. So, one can't pluck out something regarding clothing yet neglect issues regarding food. That is not how the Law works. (James 2:10)

Yes, I understand but are we not a part of Israel today?

Up until about 70 AD the church was still essentially Jewish. Once the temple was destroyed, the church scattered. All of these customs were tied to the earthly Kingdom through Israel. The temple and the city were at the heart of this. This is where the feast were celebrated. Tied into each of these was also the act of sacrifice. No temple, no priesthood, no sacrifice. But Israel now has a High Priest who was also THE sacrifice. Nothing is any longer bound to geography, a levitical priesthood, or the Law.

I can agree that the sacrifices have been done away with, but as far as the other customs, I don't see how they have been done away with. Of course none of this would have to do with anyone's salvation but how one could get closer to God perhaps.

[jlay]

Yes, I understand but are we not a part of Israel today?

In one sense we are, but not in the sense that I understand you are implying.

Of course none of this would have to do with anyone's salvation but how one could get closer to God perhaps.

G, I know you are very interested in Israel, and the events going on today. However, there is NOW only one mediator, and that is Christ. Everything under Israel's covenant symbolizes the distance between God and man. Through Christ, the veil was torn, and even us Gentiles have direct access. I wouldn't argue that learning about those traditions will grow our minds to better understand what is happening today. And to help us understand the Messiah, and God's plans, and how these things were fulfilled. But I do not agree that practising them will bring one closer to God.

[Katabole]

Katabole, can I ask which church you attend?

I sent you a PM regarding what church I attend G.

[Gman]

Katabole, can I ask which church you attend?

I sent you a PM regarding what church I attend G.

Oh sorry Katabole.. I'll check it out.