You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘torah’ tag.
Romans 8:3-4 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh; so that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard believers say, “Oh, I’m not under the law, but under grace!” Aside from the matter that Romans 6:14 is being taken out of context when it’s used this way – the “law” referred to here is not specifically the law of Moses, but rather the law of sin & death which came through Adam; see my explanation here — does that mean we are to disregard the law? I think, somewhat unfortunately, that too many believers come to that conclusion, whether they realize it or not. They similarly take another verse, Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for everyone who believes, to reinforce the notion that Christ somehow did away with the law. Never mind that He himself said that he came to do no such thing. And please take no notice of the fact that the word “end” in this verse, or “fulfill” in Matthew 5:17 mean not to terminate but to consummate. Is a marriage terminated because it’s consummated? Of course not!
So then what are we to do with the law? Even if we were to keep it, that would not make us righteous, so what’s the point?
I think we’re missing the point entirely when we say things like that. The law was given so that we can know right from wrong. Or more importantly, from the viewpoint of restoring the love relationship between us and our Creator — which is what our salvation is really all about — the law was given so that we would know what our Lover likes and dislikes, loves and hates, accepts or rejects.
This is basic salvation 101 to say that we all needed Jesus to come to take away our sin, since we were completely incapable of doing so ourselves. You won’t find many Christians arguing that point. But what we do seem to miss a great deal of the time is that this isn’t just so we can be forgiven, but so we can have an opportunity to come into communion with a holy God. God cannot have communion was ungodliness. And we were incapable of godliness until Jesus came and removed the barrier. And now that the barrier is removed, we have to know what constitutes godliness in order to live in it. And there’s where we stumble. We tend at this point to wander off into some nebulous – or worse, religious — idea of what that is. Most of us have a pretty good idea of the basics — the nine* commandments are a good starting point – but most of us also carry a sense around with us that that’s not all there is.
And we’re right. That isn’t all there is. He wrote us a big, thick Book, and we ought to read it to discover what He wants, what He likes, and what He hates. And, if we’re honest, we’ll admit that we haven’t exactly done that either. Even if we are careful to do the basics, we always feel like there’s something missing. But – thanks be to God – He doesn’t leave us there, any more than He leaves us in utter sin. After we come through the Door, Jesus, into the sheep pen, the Shepherd begins to raise us up into what He wants us to be, day by day. But we lose track of what He’s doing when we don’t go back to the Book He wrote to see what’s next. And we miss most of the Book when we throw out huge chunks of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy because we think that’s just “the law of Moses.” Which brings me back to the title of this post: if we walk day by day in the way God leads us, we can fulfill all of His desire. Not just the basics, but the “righteousness which is of the law” — the whole enchilada.
—————————————————————————
* I know; it’s supposed to be ten commandments, but most of Christianity (as far as I can tell) kind of skips # 4: remember the seventh day to keep it holy, so that leaves nine. Most of us are OK, though, with thou shalt not kill, commit adultery, steal, etc.
If it sounds surprising to you that there is any place where the Christian New Testament* and the Jewish Talmud are on the same page, so to speak, it did to me at first, too. But now, the more I study, the more I discover there are a great many places where both the Jewish sages and the Christian writers appear to be saying the same things, and often from a similar perspective.
My first exposure to this phenomenon was through Dr. A. Cohen’s Everyman’s Talmud, E.P. Dutton & Co., New York, 1949. Dr. Cohen writes from an educated Conservative Jewish perspective, not from a Christian or Messianic Jewish one. So when I saw the sayings of Jesus reflected over and over again in rabbinical parables and precepts, I began to realize that there was a lot more in common between the two supposedly divergent streams of teaching than I had previously considered or ever heard. And I got some pretty strange looks whenever I mentioned it to my fellow Christian believers.
And I’m not just talking here about the well-known fact that many different cultures have some form or another of “the golden rule.” That’s just basic human social sense. The correspondence between Gospel precepts and parables and their Talmudic counterparts are more detailed, and sometimes very much out of synch with common social wisdom. You may have read Matthew 5:28, “I say to you that whoever looks on a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart,” but you may not have read this in the Talmud: "He that looks upon a woman’s heel, is as if he looked upon her belly: and he that looks upon her belly, is as if he lay with her."
Or Luke 24:5 “And as they were afraid, and bowed their faces down to the earth, they said to them, Why do you seek the living among the dead?” is very much like this rabbinical quote found in Cohen: “a person who lost his son went to inquire for him in a cemetery …is it the way to inquire for the dead among the living or the dead? Surely it is always the practice of the living to attend to the needs of the dead, not vice versa!”
Luke 8:18, “Therefore be careful how you hear. For whoever has, to him shall be given; and whoever has not, from him shall be taken even that which he seems to have,” is not much different from this: “God’s measure is not like the measure of flesh and blood. The measure of flesh and blood is this: ‘An empty vessel is receptive, but a full one can take in no more. But God’s measure is this, The full vessel is receptive of more, but the empty vessel receives nothing; according as it is said, If hearing thou wilt hear; that is, If thou hearest thou shalt hear; if thou dost not hear, thou shalt not hear.”
Those are just a few instances of what I began to run into. I started bookmarking them as I came to them, but the book began filling with slips of paper citing Gospel verses where they matched the Talmudic reading under discussion. Too much to be mere coincidence. This got me to wondering if perhaps the sages, since they historically followed Jesus and the apostles, were maybe just copy-catting, but then I considered that it seemed more likely that both Jesus and the sages followed the same stream, which ultimately comes from the same source: the Torah.
Which makes complete sense, if we dare allow ourselves to go there in our minds. Another one of the books I mention on my Resources page lays it all out rather clearly: that Jesus was (and therefore still is) a Jewish Rabbi of the first order, in love with the Torah, perfectly diligent to keep every one of its precepts and statutes and judgments with all of his heart and soul and strength. Like no other, before or since. Yet isn’t it his desire for us that we follow his example?
So began a delightful journey over the past several months, looking into contemporary Jewish theological literature and Biblical commentary, not necessarily digging for parallels and correspondences, but keeping an eye out for them, all the while drinking in the richness of the wisdom of men who had been studying the Scriptures for hundreds of years before Martin Luther was even a twinkle in Daddy Luther’s eye.
I’ve become especially fond of the Stone Editions of the Pentateuch (Chumash) and Hebrew Scriptures (Tanach) from Artscroll Mesorah. I began keeping a handwritten journal of choice nuggets as I came across them, and even that is now filling up so much as to be hard to keep track of. I’ve shared a few of these things with friends, and I still get some odd looks, but not as many, and not quite so odd. So I’m going to try to follow along here, as much as is practical. Partly so I can come here myself and use the web browser ‘find’ function to look up something I’d noted earlier, and partly to share. If no one else comes here, that’s OK; I’ll still find this method useful for my own purposes. But if anyone does wander this way, maybe they’ll be blessed, or at least piqued to poke around the powerful principles which tend to pile up where the Talmud and New Testament meet.
————————————————————————————-
(*Just to mention it here, one of the important principles I learned in Gruber’s book Copernicus and the Jews – see my Resources page – is that the use of the term New Testament to refer to the Scriptures written after the close of the Hebrew canon is, if you’ll pardon my saying, completely unscriptural. Gruber thoroughly explains this in his chapter Dr. Frankenstein’s Neighborhood Bible Club. I’d love to spend some time with you quoting and summarizing, but I’ll restrain myself here, and bow to common usage, in order to be understood without having to go over the matter every time I post. A similar deference I’ll make is with respect to the use of the term “Christian.” Gruber also spends a chapter on this, but simply put, it’s not at all clear from “New Testament” Scripture that the early disciples ever thought of themselves by that term, and certainly not primarily. Interesting stuff, really, once you get into it, but not necessary at this point. Also please note my use of the term Talmud is in the most general sense. I refer the interested reader to Dr. Cohen’s book for a very good explanation of what that entails.)
No, really – it’s been that long.
I’ve been working elsewhere, and something someone said in one of those elsewhere places got me to thinking about how close I come in my own mind to maybe wishing I were Jewish.
I figured out that I’m not really near that point at all, which wasn’t a huge surprise, but I also got a clearer perspective on where I stand as a goy in relation to the Jewish world.
This particular person, an Orthodox lady on Twitter (who shall remain nameless for the sake of this blog, since it’s what she said that matters, not who said it), seemed intrigued as to why I wanted to study Torah (or Talmud), and said something about how hard it is sometimes to keep all those mitzvot, but how wonderful it is to be in the privileged position to be under the obligation.
Wonderful, yes, it would be, but knowing I’m not, I got to thinking would I want to? That it is, would I want to convert? Simple answer – no. That, my friends, completely skewers any wannabe attitude. I mean, how could I say I wannabe, if given the chance, I would not. Not that I’ve really said here that I am or was a wannabe Jew – wannabe, or wouldabeen-nicetobeen actual Shabbos Goy, yes, but I don’t think I’ve ever said I thought I was a wannabe Jew. But I’ve thought about it.
And all that made me also think a little harder about what is it that I do want to be in relation to the Jewish people. I’m not sure if this constitutes a fall-back position, but my basic vista point (like one of those places on a scenic highway) is that I who was born into darkness have been shown the light because Am HaSefer carried that light for centuries, carefully preserving it and transmitting it from one generation to the next, until it shined on me.
Yes, of course it was through HaAdon Yeshua HaMashiach the Lord Jesus Christ that this occurred, but it’s not just a simple matter of saying that we ought to love the Jews because Jesus was (never mind that He still is) Jewish. It’s also because a nation, and not just a nation, but thousands and millions of individual people – men, women, children, families – lived and died for the purpose of carrying the light of life in the form of a book, and in the form of their own lives. Not everyone lived their daily lives thinking that way, nor likely many at all, but it was the fact of their lives nonetheless.
And because of the purpose and sacrifice of these many, many souls, I have life.
They had life given to them, to give to me, and they gave what they had, and now I have life.
I think perhaps some gratefulness is in order. Well, more than some. But a remarkable thing about gratefulness is that it’s human nature to begin to put on a pedestal those to whom we are rightly grateful. And that is not good. It does them a disservice, in that we then may begin to expect more from them from that point on than is fair, and it also is a first step toward idolizing them. Even if we don’t go that far, we tend to start thinking that most of what they do is right – that it must be, because that’s who they are. There is, for instance, a serious tendency among Christian Zionists to give cart blanche support to the State of Israel, defending its actions even when they are wrong and we know it. Or maybe sometimes we don’t know it when they’re wrong, because we’ve got them up on that pedestal.
So I have to watch myself on that account. But still my heart is deeply moved that, at no particular cost to me, I have life through the written Word of God, preserved at such great, great cost by the People of the Book.
Numbers Chapter 18: “And YHWH said to Aaron: You and your sons and your father’s house with you shall bear the iniquity of the sanctuary, and you and your sons with you shall bear the iniquity of your priesthood… And you shall keep the charge of the sanctuary and the charge of the altar, that there be no more wrath upon the children of Israel… And YHWH spoke to Aaron: I, behold I have also given you the charge of …all the holy things of the children of Israel; I have given them to you and your sons because of the anointing, as a perpetual ordinance.”
Please correct me, anyone, if I’m wrong, but I’ve read in more than a few places which explain traditional Judaism* that Messiah, when he comes, will arise as the King and Deliverer of Israel. This is certainly true, and would to God more goyim would realize and acknowledge this. And would to God that more goyim who profess to be followers of Christ would realize and acknowledge that to truly do so is to pledge allegiance to Israel’s King.
But are we missing something here? Isn’t the anointing of the high priest just as much of an anointing as that of the king?
The high priest is the messiah of YHWH, just as much as the king. Why am I not seeing this pointed out?
We need to understand that much of what we read in Torah may be understood as illustrations of eternal truth, as well as the explicit instructions of the God of Israel. And is it just me, or isn’t there a marvelous picture in Numbers Chapter 18 of YHWH’s anointed being set out to bear a more profound iniquity than merely his own? You have to notice that the reason YHWH gives for instituting this assignment for the high priest is “that there be no more wrath upon the children of Israel.” If you go back and read the preceding chapters of the book, you’ll see that there was plenty of iniquity and plenty of resulting wrath going on! There had to be something done – the present system wasn’t working. It doesn’t seem fair to tell Aaron that from now on, he’s going to bear the iniquity of the entire community, but if you were in the shoes of anyone else there but him, you wouldn’t be the first one to point that out, would you?
It is surely an admirable thing for someone to suppose that they can atone for their own sin through repentance and prayer, and to make a sincere effort to that end. But what does it take? Is anyone good enough – can anyone be or become good enough – to satisfy Elohim’s just demand for absolute, flawless righteousness? Let’s just start with the number one requirement – to love Him with everything we’ve got, and the person across the street, to boot!
It’s not that it’s humanly impossible, but we start out just far enough behind in that quest to ever quite get caught up (you may have noticed, if you’ve had children, that the first word many learn is “no!”), and each day that we fail to live up to even the first requirement, the farther behind we get. But if we had someone to take all iniquity away from us, to bear it away for us – ah, then we might have a fresh start, mightn’t we? And what if – could it be this good? – what if that sin-bearer could always be there for us each new day, and bear it away if and when we slip up again?
Ah, but would that be what we want, really? A guarantee of sin-then-get-forgiven today, and then sin-but-get-forgiven tomorrow, and then sin-but-get-forgiven-again the next day, and so forth? I think that is, unfortunately, what we do experience in Christianity, but I don’t buy for one minute that this is what God ever intended for us. There is a much greater place for tshuva and tikkun olam in our lives than we often realize, and sometimes I think that those who see this as their only means to atonement have a practical leg up on Christians who act as though we think we can “continue in sin that grace may abound,” as Paul puts it. But first we need that fresh start. We need a High Priest who will bear our iniquity, at least until we can come into our inheritance as children of the Most High.
(* For example, Jews for Judaism is a provocative resource for understanding the traditional viewpoint, updated to our time; another detailed site is Judaism 101.
Take a look at specific and detailed references to the traditional concept of Messiah, and, if you’re brave, at an argument against vicarious atonement.)
Or, The Romans and the Law, part II
Rom 13:10 Love does no evil to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the Law.
Which “Law” does love fulfill? Love fulfills Torah. “Jesus said to him, You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”
So, to those Christians who say they are not under Law, but under grace, if they do not distinguish between Torah and the law of sin & death, does this mean they are not obligated to love God and their neighbor?
“The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. (Romans 8:2)”
I see no mention in either of these two verses of the “law of Moses.”
Have you ever heard before of “the law of sin and death?” Did you think it’s the law (Torah) of Moses?
One of the most annoying things about the Bible (annoying, that is, unless you choose to love it) is that in order to understand one verse you often have to read a great deal more than that verse. The book of Romans discusses “law” or “the law” in about a zillion places. Well, ok, it’s only 50-something times, but in 16 chapters, that’s a lot!
A friend said something lately which sounded like he was saying because he’s under the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, he didn’t have to pay much attention to the requirements of what we call the Old Testament. “Oh, I don’t have to worry about that stuff – I’m not under the law, but under grace.” Or words to that effect. If I’d asked him about it, he would have said that’s not what he meant, and I know him well enough to know he was not at all dismissing the Hebrew Scriptures, but the context of his comment showed that he didn’t really understand what “the law” is.
I think that’s true of a lot of us, including myself. I’m discovering there’s a whole lot more to learn before I say “I’m right and he’s wrong.”
But when my friend said what he did, something clicked. I suddenly realized that Romans chapter six is not at all about Torah. It struck me that in order to understand what “law” he’s talking about in chapter six, you have to go back to chapter 5, which talks about the sin (disobedience) of Adam bringing about not only his death, but the death of all his descendants, in that every one of them (us) was sure to sin. That’s the “law” (not a Torah – not a teaching or instruction – but an unavoidable outcome, like gravity) of sin and death. “The wages of sin is death.” (Last verse in chapter 6.) You work, you get paid your wages; you sin, your payment is death. Simple.
“But the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
We don’t have to sin – we can be free from sin – *if* we come through the Way that is Jesus, and He enables us to stop sinning, as we learn His way. There’s a whole lot more I could say about that some time, but for now I’m just saying that’s what I see going on in this chapter.
So, back to Torah (the “law of Moses”). Is Romans talking about that at all?
Yep. And this is where we often get mixed up, as I think my friend was. Now ask yourself (assuming you acknowledge the reality of sin, or why have else you read this far) – do you know what sin is? If you answered, disobedience to God, good answer. But to disobey someone you have to know what they told you to do, or what they told you not to do, right?
I think you’re following me, here – I can just feel it. We can know with certainty what pleases or displeases God by simply reading the Book He wrote to us. (The Bible.) The essence of His likes and dislikes is contained in the books of His servant Moses. The Torah.
We’re born with an innate sense of right from wrong (conscience), but if you look around you, when people just go by their own conscience, without any further instruction, things eventually don’t work out so well. Never mind that the more we practice following our own inclinations, the farther we get from God’s directions.
So that’s what Torah (the law of Moses) is – God’s Big Ol’ Instruction Book. The “Owner’s Manual” for our lives. Or, How to Live and not Die, in five easy volumes.
Which is why Paul talks about the law of Moses so much throughout the Book of Romans, in relation to the issues of death & sin, or obedience & life.
But please, let’s not confuse the two. God forbid we should ever be freed from His instructions on how to live! But we have been freed from the law of sin and death (if we will be willing and obedient), through the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus.
Shabbes Goy 