Re: The Law
Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 11:09 pm
I yam what yam, and I think how I think. 
.Canuckster, I for one did understand what you were saying
, and would say I very much agree. I think you've made a really important point that needs to be confronted by the church.The idea of law vs. grace is one that so permeates the evangelical church nowadays, but it's a false dichotomy. It's not Biblical. No conservative Christian can say that there aren't still commandments (Matt 22:36-40; John 13:34; 1 Cor 7:19; 1 Thess 4:2; 1 John 2:3-4; Rev 14:12) and a Law (1 Cor 9:21; Gal 6:2) for us to follow. We just disagree on which commandments we have to keep and how many Laws there are (I would say one, others would say two).
A couple points I want to make on things I see come up in this conversation often.
1) The idea that there are only two commandments for those in Christ to follow: to love G-d with all one's heart, soul, and might, and to love one's neighbor as himself.
This is based on a faulty understanding of a remark of Yeshua (Matt 22:36-40) and of reiterations of that teaching by Paul in his letters (Romans 13:9; Gal 5:14), as well as in the letter of James (James 2:8). This teaching is misunderstood because the church is so separated from its Jewish roots and from the historical/cultural/theological context these teachings were taught in. There are instances in the Tanakh (Old Testament) of the prophets summing up G-d's Torah in a few moral principles. Isaiah does so at Isaiah 1:16-17,
"Cease to do evil,
Learn to do good;
Seek justice,
Reprove the ruthless,
Defend the orphan,
Plead for the widow."
Note also verses 11-14,
"'What are your multiplied sacrifices to Me?'
Says HaShem.
'I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams
And the fat of fed cattle;
And I take no pleasure in the blood of bulls, lambs or goats.
When you come to appear before Me,
Who requires of you this trampling of My courts?
Bring your worthless offerings no longer,
Incense is an abomination to Me.
New Moon and Shabbat, the calling of assemblies—
I cannot endure iniquity and the solemn assembly.
I hate your new moon festivals and your appointed feasts,
They have become a burden to Me;
I am weary of bearing them.'"
The same thing happens at Micah 6:8, although I want to add in verses 6-7 because I think they're important for my point.
"With what shall I come to HaShem
And bow myself before the G-d on high?
Shall I come to Him with burnt offerings,
With yearling calves?
Does HaShem take delight in thousands of rams,
In ten thousand rivers of oil?
Shall I present my firstborn for my rebellious acts,
The fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?
He has told you, O man, what is good;
And what does HaShem require of you
But to do justice, to love kindness,
And to walk humbly with your G-d?"
Now remember, this is "Old Testament" times still. By saying that G-d simply wants us to "do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly before Him," was He saying that keeping Shabbat wasn't necessary? Was He saying that eating swine or shaving your beard weren't sins? Of course we'd all agree that the answer is no. What about when G-d says through Isaiah and Micah that the offerings are "worthless" and that He takes no pleasure in them, or in the celebration of Shabbat, the New Moons, and the appointed festivals? What would happen if the hearers of these prophets then stopped performing sacrifices? Remember, this is the Old Covenant. It would've been sin.
There's a famous story in the Talmud- of two contemporary rabbis, Hillel and Shammai (both from a little bit before Yeshua's day). They both had schools of study and represented opposite ends of Jewish thought/theology; Hillel being the more tolerant and compassionate, and Shammai being more of a stickler for the law. Yeshua's teachings coincide strikingly well with Hillel's; He was probably a fan. In this story, a gentile leaves behind the idols of his people and wants to start worshipping the G-d of Israel. But the barrier is the Torah; he knows nothing of it, and knows that to the Jewish people, it is the source of all knowledge of G-d, how He wants to be served, and how he wants to have His people live. He decides he doesn't have the time to learn the whole Torah, and resolves to go to the most eminent of the sages to have them teach him a short version of the Torah. Going first to Shammai, he asks, "Teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot!" Ie; teach me the whole Torah in a couple minutes. Now, Shammai had a measuring rod in his hand at the time. Thinking of the audacity and ignorance of this gentile asking to be taught the entire Torah of Moses while standing on on foot, Shammai scared him off with a good whack. Shaken but still steadfast, the gentile goes to Rabbi Hillel. Asking again, "Teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot!" Hillel replies, "What is hateful to you, do not do unto others (cf. Matthew 7:12; Luke 6:31). The rest is commentary - go and study."
Now, Hillel obviously didn't mean that since the golden rule (or its negative form) is the underlying principle of Torah that the rest is unnecessary, or that one needn't keep all the commandments if he "got" the spiritual, deeper meaning behind them. He simply summed them up. It was a Biblical practice. It was done to make Torah less daunting, more accessible, appear more unified, and to encourage people to follow it. Yeshua's doing of this same practice implies nothing more than that our Rabbi used a rabbinical teaching technique, that is rooted in Scripture. Any other implications found in His (or Paul's, or James') statement are read into it. The "work of G-d" is beliving in the One Whom He sent, most definitely. But that doesn't mean one can believe and still murder and be found guiltless, does it? Instead it means, "by believing, one has done what is required of him. And by believing, he will be led to obey." Obedience is an extention of faith, not the other way around.
But one may say, "Well, that's all well and good for someone following the Old Covenant, but I don't see anything in the New Testament telling me to keep the Sabbath, or to not eat shellfish, or to celebrate the feast of Pentecost." This leads me to my next point.
2) The idea that if it's not taught or commanded in the "New Testament," it needn't be practiced/followed.
This one is one that the church is so fond of these days, and yet there's no Biblical support for it. Where in the Gospels will you see Yeshua answer one who comes to Him asking how one obtains eternal life, "You must follow these teachings of Mine, which are new. The old way cannot save you"? Where in Paul's letters do you see him saying, "This is the new way of how you should walk," or "Here are the new commandments." His teachings are original, obviously, but they're rooted in Scripture (Old Testament)/Torah. His ethical and daily practice teachings along with his theological ones. Why in Revelation (Rev 14:12) are the saints referred to as the ones who keep their faith in Jesus and who "keep the commandments of G-d"? Note that the Apostolic Scriptures rarely if ever explicitly say "Yeshua is G-d," but instead proclaim His divinity in more nuanced ways (not that the doctrine of Yeshua isn't clear; it is, but it's not stated in such a way in the Apostolic Writings).
To say that one only follows the teachings/commandments of the "New Testament" is to misunderstand its scope and purpose. No book of New Covenant Scripture proclaims to have the list of commandments for those "in Christ." Instead, they always refer back to Torah/Tanakh (Matt 22:36-40; Romans 15:4; 2 Timothy 3:15-17).
Hopefully this will provide some fuel for further good discussions. Peace and blessings to everyone, hope you've had a great new year.
