THREE STRIKES, BUT NOT OUT

 

In this week’s Torah reading (12/13/2014), Joseph’s brothers reject Joseph and sell him into slavery.  How many times did Joseph’s brothers reject Joseph?  I count three times:

 
“They hated him and could not speak to him on friendly terms.” (Gen 37:4)
 “They hated him even more.” (Gen 37:5)
 “So they hated him even more for his dreams and for his words.” (Gen 37:8)
 

It was after rejecting Joseph three times that his brothers “plotted against him to put him to death,” (Gen 37:18).  Of course you know where I am headed with this analogy.

 

Most believers know that shortly after professing a willingness to die for the Master (Matt 26:35), Peter denied knowing Jesus three times, (Matt 26:69-70, 26:71-72, 26:73-74).  With the third denial, Peter “began to curse and swear, ‘I do not know the man!’”, (Matt 26:74).  What is less known is that the leadership of the nation of Israel also denied Jesus three times.

 
(1) “Then Pilate said to the chief priest and the crowds, ‘I find no guilt in this man.  But they kept on insisting saying, ‘He stirs up the people’” (Luke 23:4-5),
 (2) “‘Therefore I (Pilate) will punish Him and release Him.’ But they cried out all together saying, ‘Away with this man and release for us Barabbas!’” (Luke 23: 16-18),
 (3) “And he (Pilate) said to them a third time, ‘Why what evil has this man done? I have found in Him no guilt demanding death; therefore I will punish Him and release Him.’ But they were insistent, with loud voices asking that He be crucified.  And their voices began to prevail.” (Luke 23:22-23).

Peter’s third denial came with an oath, “I do not know the man!” (Matt 26:72)  An oath is considered unchangeable, (Heb 6:17-18), as reflected by the words of the Hebrew author, “The LORD has sworn and will not change His mind, ‘You are a priest forever,’” (Heb 7:21).  The good news is that Peter, and every believer, is able to find a path back to God through repentance, (Matt 26:75)(Luke 22:32).  Through repentance, God is able to change that which is unchangeable, “With God all things are possible,” (Matt 19:26).

 

We know the outcome of Joseph’s brothers.  The brothers repented of their hatred toward Joseph (Gen 42:21, 44:33), Joseph forgave his brothers (Gen 45:15), and Joseph never held a grudge or ill-will against them, (Gen 50:20-21).  Scripture also foretells of a future time when the nation of Israel will repent, “They will look on Me whom they pierced; and they will mourn for Him as one mourns for and only son, and they will weep bitterly over Him like the bitter weeping over a firstborn,” (Zech 12:10). 

 

Believers should be encouraged by all these examples.  No matter how far we drift away from God, denying Him by our words and deeds, there always remains a path back to the Father and the Son through repentance,

 
“Therefore repent and return, so that your sins may be wiped away, in order that the times of refreshing may come from the presence of the LORD: and He may send Jesus, the Christ appointed for you, whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time,” (Acts 3:19-21).
 

The believer should never give up or consider that repentance is beyond reach.  Even though it took Joseph’s brothers over twenty years, and Israel’s national repentance still awaits after 2000 years, repentance was, and still will be accepted by God. 

 

God rewards persistence, which is fundamental to repentance.  Elisha was told by Elijah three times to stay and stop following him, saying “Stay here” (2 Kings 2:2), “Elisha, please stay here” (2 Kings 2:4), and “Please stay here” (2 Kings 2:6).  To these requests, Elisha responded, “As the Lord lives, and as you yourself live, I will not leave you.”  For his perseverance and faith, Elisha was rewarded with a double portion of the Spirit when he saw Elijah carried away by “a chariot of fire and horses of fire…And Elijah went up by a whirlwind to heaven,” (2 Kings 2:11). 
 
Never let people tell you that the path to the Father and the Son is closed, for even, “If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself,” (2 Tim 2:13).
 
All the best - Scott

 

 

Providence and Freewill: Sadducees, Pharisees, and Essenes

 
“The Sadducees do not allocate ‘Fate’ any role in human affairs, and they deny both immorality of the soul and resurrection; the Essenes ascribe all human actions to the power of fate and believe in both immortality and resurrection; the Pharisees adopt a middle course, ascribing power to both fate and human free will, and believing in immortality and resurrection.” [1]

The debate about God’s providence and man’s freewill has existed from before the time of Jesus Christ.  The Sadducees believed that God did not intervene in the affairs of man and that all consequences were the result of each man’s own action.  This was an attractive position to espouse since the Sadducees were in the upper class of society.  The Sadducees controlled the operation of the temple, socialized with the ruling Herodians, and accumulated great wealth from their status and position.  They resisted any person or group that endangered their status, which was the earthly motivation that brought Jesus before Pontus Pilate. 

At the other extreme were the Essenes who ascribed all outcomes to “fate”.  This attitude led the Essenes to distance themselves from the greater society.  Although some Essenes lived in Jerusalem, a large majority lived in a communal dwelling around Qumran on the Dead Sea.  The Essenes believed that they were the true priests, the descendants of the Zadok priesthood who would reign with the Messiah when he was revealed.  The Essenes felt minimal obligation to impact the society around them so they moved to Qumran and awaited the coming of the Messiah.  

The Pharisees “adopted a middle course, ascribing power to both fate and human free will”.  In other words, the Pharisees attempted to reconcile the providence and complete control of the Creator with the knowledge that mankind is accountable and will be judged for our actions.  Since man is accountable for our actions, Pharisees called individuals to “live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age,” (Titus 2:12).   

It should not be surprising that this debate continues into the present as the finite mind of man attempts to reconcile the infinite nature of God.  However, our understanding should not negate our obedience or good works.  Believers should not be like the Sadducees crediting blessing and success to our own actions.  Nor should believers be like the Essenes, completely removed from the world, taking no action to manifest the kingdom, only waiting until the end.  Believers need to be performing the "good works which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them" (Eph 2:10), acknowledging that our freewill operates within the providence of God’s overall plan.  The specific interaction of the two remains a mystery shrouded within the cloud of the Creator.

 

Have a blessed week, Scott

---

[1] From Maccabees to the Mishnah, Shaye J.D. Cohen, Second Edition (2006), page 138-139

Faith...Faithful...Faithfulness (One Last Pass)

I keep having additional thoughts related to faith and faithfulness as we pass through Hebrews 11 in our morning bible study.  (Forgive me for revisiting the subject again.)  Dan Lancaster pointed out in one of his lessons that the Greek word for faith has some ambiguity that permits it to be translated as "faith" or "faithfulness".  Lancaster speculated that Paul used this ambiguity to his advantage when communicating to a society that focused on the mind over the heart. 

 

Sometimes I find it interesting to compare the usage of similar biblical concepts in the Hebrew text and the Greek text.  Since God is unchanging (Mal 3:6), “the same yesterday and today and forever” (Heb 13:8), we expect the fundamental principles related to obedience and worship of God to be unchanging.  This principle both provides the believer with a solid foundation from the beginning of scripture and offers a way to test the validity of new insights into scripture.  When we find a difference between a biblical principle in the Hebrew text compared to the Greek text, we should stop, take note, and ask why the difference appears to exist.

One place we find a difference is in the way “faith” and “faithfulness” are presented in the Hebrew and Greek texts.  The following tables presents the different frequencies faith related words are found in sections of the New American Standard translation.

	Use of the word…	Hebrew Text	Gospel and Acts	Pauline Epistles	Hebrews Epistle	Other Epistles
	Faith	4	41	136	31	23
	Faithful	29	9	17	6	3
	Faithfully	14	0	0	0	1
	Faithfulness	38	1	2	0	0
	Unfaithful(ness)	38	0	0	0	0

While the New Testament appears to focus primarily on “faith”, the Old Testament emphasis is on “faithfulness”, or “unfaithfulness” when a person fails to remain “faithful”.  From the Hebrew text we read, “The LORD will repay each man for his righteousness and his faithfulness,” (1 Sam 26:23).  The most frequently quoted passages in the New Testament include: “Faith comes from hearing and hearing the word of God” (Rom 10:17), “Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” (Heb 11:1), and “The righteous man shall live be faith,” (Rom 1:17).

One simple and reasonable explanation for the difference between the “faithfulness” of the Old Testament and “faith” in the New Testament focuses on the different audiences of the prophets and the apostles.  A largely Hebraic audience, “entrusted with the oracles of God” (Rom 3:2), and already possessing a knowledge of God, did not need to come to “faith” in God, but to return to God through repentance and acts of faithfulness.  However, the New Testament Gentile audience did not possess the same understanding, but were largely devoid of any knowledge of God, “having no hope and without God in the world,” (Eph 2:12).  First century Gentiles needed to first believe and profess faith in the one true God before they could move on toward the calling of faithfulness.  After Gentile believers came to “faith” in Jesus Christ, they were then expected to progress toward a life of “faithfulness”, as it is written, “The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentle ness, self-control,” (Gal 5:22).

Unfortunately, the focus on “faith” in the New Testament has been largely preached to the detriment of “faithfulness.”  As a result, believers do not often “press on to maturity,” (Heb 6:1).  Although “faith” and “faithfulness” are closely linked, they become somewhat separated as they pass from Hebrew through Greek and into the English language.  Faithfulness implies a lifestyle lived in obedience to God, “I have chosen the faithful way, I have place Your ordinances before me,” (Psalms 119:30).  On the other hand, “faith” is more often viewed as an intellectual position, “I have faith in Jesus” or “Have you put your faith in Jesus?”  When we speak of “faith” in the Greek text, we should also understand that “faithfulness” is implied.

 

The focus on faith over faithfulness is also impacted by translational considerations as the principle passes from the Hebrew language through Greek and into English.  This is not unique.  For example, the original Hebrew word for repentance is “teshuvah,” which literally means “to turn around,” as in, “Repent, then and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out,” (Acts 3:19).  True repentance is also accompanied by deeds, as John the Baptist spoke, “Therefore bear fruit in keeping with repentance,” (Matt 3:8).  Unfortunately, the Greek word used for repentance in the New Testament is “metanoeo,” and is understood to mean, “changing a person’s mind.”  As a result, modern repentance has often been reduced to an expression of sorrow for our actions, when restitution or other acts for a wrong may also be required.

The Greek word used for faith, “pistis” (Strongs-4102), is somewhat ambiguous, because it can be translated as either “faith” (Rom 1:16), or “faithfulness,” (Rom 3:3).  The specific translation is dependent on the context, although the primary translation in the New Testament is “faith”.  It appears that Paul used this ambiguity in “pistis” from the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) to his advantage.  Paul spoke of “faith” to a largely Greek audience that elevated the intellect above the physical action, (Acts 17:21).  By comparison the Hebrew believer focused on the heart as the motivating force behind action, as it is written, “Doing the will of God from the heart,” (Eph 6:6).  For this reason, the original call to action in the Hebrew text is often morphed into contemplations of the mind as the text passed through the Greek language into the English, i.e., “faithfulness” (action) becomes “faith” (thought or profession of the mind). 

“Pistis” can mean faith in the New Testament, such as in, “Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” (Heb 11:1).  However, many times “pistis” would be better understood as “faithfulness”, such as “Without faithfulness it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is the rewarder of those who seek Him,” (Heb 11:6).  “Faithfulness” is more appropriate in this verse because both belief and action are referenced.  A key component that must be incorporated into any faith is the action of seeking God, as Paul wrote of man, “That they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him,” (Acts 17:27). 

There are numerous other examples in the New Testament were “faith” can (and should) be translated as “faithfulness”.  For example, the frequent New Testament phrase “faith in Christ Jesus” (Gal 2:16, 3:22, 3:26, 5:6) can also be translated “faith of Jesus” or “faithfulness of Jesus.”  According to Dwight Pryor, the literal Greek reads “faith(fulness) Jesus Christ”, which leads the conjunctive word and emphasis open to interpretation.  More often than not, the emphasis should not be on man, but on Jesus Who is called “A faithful high priest in things pertaining to God,” (Heb 2:17).  Therefore, an equally valid translation can read, “For you are all sons of God through the faithfulness of Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:26)

The often quoted passage of Paul, “The righteous one shall live by faith” (Rom 1:16-17), originates from the prophet Habakkuk, “The righteous will live by his faith,” (Hab 2:4).  The Hebrew word “emunah” occurs over 30 times in the Hebrew text and is only translated as “faith” this one time in Habakkuk 2:4.  At other times, it is translated as “faithfulness” (25 times) and faithfully (8 times).  Therefore, it would be more accurate to translate the passage as “The righteous one shall live by faithfulness.”  Unfortunately, it appears that the English translators back translated Habakkuk based on their interpretation of Paul, rather than be consistent with how “emunah” is translated elsewhere in the Hebrew text.

In the chapter of faith (Hebrews 11), all the examples provided by the author demonstrate faithfulness by their actions, such as: Abel offered to God a better sacrifice than Cain (Heb 11:4), Noah warned about things not seen built an ark (Heb 11:7), Abraham obeyed by going to a place to receive a reward (Heb 11:8), Abraham “lived as an alien in the land of promise…for he was looking for the city which has foundation, whose architect and builder is God,” (Heb 11:9-10), Abraham “Offered us Isaac, and he who had received the promises was offering up his only begotten,” (Heb 11:17), etc.  The chapter on faith concludes by describing the faithfulness of other individuals:

“What more shall  I say? For time will fail me if I tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets, who by faith conquered kingdoms, performed acts of righteousness, obtained promises, shut the mouth of lions, quenched the power of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, from weakness were made strong, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight…And all these, having gained approval through their faith, did not receive what was promised,” (Heb 11:32-39)

Although “faith” is required of all believers, our faith must lead to a daily walk of “faithfulness”, as it is written, “If you have not been faithful in the use of unrighteous wealth, who will entrust the true riches to you?” (Luke 16:11).  To the unfaithful (Num 5:6), Jesus warns, “Depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness,” (Matt 7:23).

 

Have a blessed week - Scott

Ten Reasons Why...Early Jewish Believers Remained Faithful to the Commandments (Part 2)

(Continued From Part 1)
 

6)   The discussion in Paul’s epistles is commonly framed as a debate between “salvation by faith” verses “salvation by works”.  When placed in historical context, we understand that the debate centered around the need to become Jewish in order to obtain salvation.  Historically, a Gentile became a Jew by becoming a proselyte through a set of actions, commonly referred to in scripture as “works of the Law” (Rom 3:20).  Specific works included: circumcision (Gen 17:10-12), the keeping of Kosher laws, the wearing of tiztzits, and the keeping of the Sabbath (Ex 31:16-17).  The position that salvation came solely on the basis of a Jewish linage was opposed often in the New Testament.  First by John the Baptist, “Do not suppose that you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham for our father.’ For I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham” (Matt 3:9).  Then by Jesus, “They answered and said to Him, ‘Abraham is our father.’  Jesus said to them, ‘If you are Abraham’s children, do the deeds of Abraham,” (John 8:39).  Finally by Paul who wrote, “Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham,” (Gal 3:7).  The belief that being Jewish was sufficient for salvation, drove many Gentiles to become proselytes and to be circumcised.  Paul’s letters criticized these believers because they did not subsequently feel obligated to the greater commandments.  This lead to Paul’s warning, “I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law,” (Gal 5:3).  Paul’s overriding position was this, “Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, what matters is keeping the commandments of God,” (1 Cor 7:19).   

7)  The Law remains the unchanging standard that is placed on the heart of the believer in the New Covenant, (Heb: 8:10)(Jer 31:34).  This is a shocking revelation to most believers and is not evident in the Book of Hebrews because of our translation.  The passage recorded in Hebrews (Heb 8:8-12) is a direct quotation from the prophet Jeremiah (Jer 31:31-34).  The Hebrew word used is Jeremiah is “Torah”, i.e., Law, not “laws.”  To be true to the original, the passage should be rendered, “I will put My Law into their minds and I will write it on their hearts,” (Heb 8:10).  In the New Testament, the Greek word “namos” is translated as “law” 193 times, but only as “laws”, in this passage and Hebrews 10:16.  God does not change (Mal 3:6)(Heb 13:8), nor does the Law of God change, which the Hebrew author calls “unalterable” (Heb 2:2), and further warns, “Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses,” (Heb 10:28).  After all, “The Law of the Lord is perfect, restoring the soul,” (Psa 19:7). 

8)   The Sabbath is the sign of the covenant between God and the people of Israel at Mount Sinai.  The covenant is said to exist as “a perpetual covenant” and the Sabbath to remain as “a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever,” (Ex 31:16-17).  This verbiage is common for other aspects of the Law such as Aaronic priesthood “a perpetual statue” (Ex 27:21), the “perpetual incense before the LORD” (Ex 30:8), the celebration of the Jewish feasts as “a perpetual statute” (Lev 23:14, 23:21, 23:31, 23:41, 23:41), and the Levites obligation for the operation of the tabernacle “a perpetual statue” (Num 18:23).  History has shown that the Law can exist without the temple, but the temple cannot exist without the Law, which governs the operation of the temple.  The operation of the “the earthly sanctuary” is governed by “regulations of diving worship” (Heb 9:1), “imposed until a time of reformation” (Heb 9:10).  “Reformation” is generally understood as the time when the existing heavens and earth will be “reformed”.  Although the earthly temple does not currently exist, its future return is spoken of in prophecy (Ezek 40), alluded to by Paul (2 Thess 2:4), and seen in the vision of John, (Rev 11:1).  Further, the continuation of the Levitical priesthood is as sure as the promises of a Son on David's throne, "Thus says the LORD, 'If you can break My covenant for the day and My covenant for the night, so that day and night will not be at their appointed time, then My covenant may also be broken with David my servant that he shall not have a son to reign on his throne, and with the Levitical priests, My ministers,'" (Jer 33:20-21) 

9)   When asked by an expert in the Law, “What must I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus replied, “What is written in the Law?...Do this and you will live,” (Luke 10:25-28).  In reference to the Law, Jesus said, “Until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished,” (Matt 5:18).  As long as death remains (1 Cor 15:26), we understand that all is not accomplished and the Law remains in effect.  The giving of the Spirit was not a substitute for the commandments, but as a helper (John 14:16), to enable believers to walk in obedience to the commandments, as it is written, “Walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh,” (Gal 5:16). This is the manner by which Jesus walked, (Acts 1:2), and we are to walk, (1 John 2:6).  Ezekiel prophesized of the Spirit Who was to be poured out on mankind by saying, “I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statues, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances,” (Ezek 36:27)(Ezek 11:19-20).  Sometimes believers talk in terms of Jesus “fulfilling” the Law.  However, the Law is not like a prophecy that receives fulfillment.  The biblical terms “fulfill” and “abolish” are rabbinic terms.  To “fulfill” simply means to correctly demonstrate observance of the Law, while “abolish” means to improperly demonstrate observance of the Law.  The latter will keep the listener from properly observing the law, effectively abolishing the law.  The position of Jesus, “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets” (Matt 5:17).  Therefore, Jesus warned, “Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven,” (Matt 5:19).

10) Regardless of how we interpret Paul’s letters, his words do not have the authority to supersede the position of Jesus, “Until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished,” (Matt 5:18).  Therefore, contrary to popular belief, Paul held that the Law was applicable to the Jewish believer (not Gentile), and he walked in obedience to the commandments in his own life.  This is demonstrated by both the actions and the testimony of Paul.  According to the Law, Paul carried out a Nazarite vow (Acts 18:18, 21:23), participated in worship at the temple (Acts 21:23-26), presented offerings at Jerusalem (which almost universally means sacrifices)(Acts 24:17), and timed his travels to Jerusalem to coincide with the Jewish festivals, (Acts 12, 20:16).  With respect to the Law, Paul said that he was, “blameless” (Col 3:6), a term that implies total obedience, (Luke 1:6).  James had Paul complete a Nazarite vow, which Paul began on his own (Acts 18:18), to show others, "that you (Paul)...also walk orderly, keeping the Law,” (Acts 21:24).  When Paul stood before Felix at Caesarea, he stated that “According to the Way…I do serve the God of our fathers, believing everything that is in accordance with the Law and that is written in the Prophets,” (Acts 24:14).  When Paul arrived in Rome, he told the Jews, “I have done nothing against our people or against the customs of our ancestors,” (Acts 28:17).  The word “customs” is even more encompassing than just the Law.  It implies that Paul also subjected himself to the broader rabbinical interpretations on how the Law was to be specifically implemented.  Either Paul (and James) were untruthful to the brethren in Jerusalem, at Colossian, Felix at Caesarea, and the Jews at Rome, (in which case we can discount much of Paul’s writings), or Paul remained faithful to the obligations of the commandments as a Jewish believer in Jesus as the Messiah.  Remember, it was Paul who called the Law, “holy, righteous, and good” (Rom 7:12), “a law of righteousness” (Rom 9:31), because there is “the righteousness…that comes from the Law,” (Phil 3:9).  It was Paul’s own “rule” that, “Each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them,” (1 Cor 7:17-20). 

Comments are appreciated - Scott

 

Ten Reasons Why...Early Jewish Believers Remained Faithful to the Commandments (Part 1)

It is absolutely certain to me, though not to others, that early church Jews who believed in Jesus as the Messiah continued to keep the commandments.  Since this is not a widely accepted view, I decided to summarize my position by listing ten reasons why Jewish believers in the early church continued to keep the commandments contained in the Law of Moses. 

1)     “My gospel” (Rom 2:16), was Paul’s unique revelation that access to the covenant promises of Abraham was possible for Gentiles through the Messiah, apart from a personal connection to the lineage of the Jewish people.  So controversial was Paul’s position, even among the majority of the Church, that Paul initially feared that he “might be running, or had run, in vain,” (Gal 2:2).  For this reason Luke, the author of Acts, was compelled to provide a detailed record on the debate and the determination of the Jerusalem Council for the understanding of future generations, (Acts 15:1-35).  At the conclusion of this meeting, James determined that Gentiles would only be required to “abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood,” (Acts 15:20).  Since the decision only impacted Gentiles, the letter from the apostles and elders was only addressed to Gentiles, to “the brethren in Antioch and Syria and Cilica who are from the Gentiles,” (Acts 15:23).  If Paul had intended to modify the requirements of worship for Jewish believers, than Luke, a close companion of Paul on his missionary journeys, certainly would have incorporated that understanding into the Book of Acts.  We can find no reference in Acts indicating that Jewish believers were released from the greater obligation to the Law. 

 

2)     Over ten years later, around 58 A.D., Paul returned to Jerusalem to find Jewish believers unchanged in their commitment, “all zealous for the Law,” (Acts 21:20).  Ten years was a sufficient time to contemplate and discuss the matter, yet no change had occurred to the position of Jewish believers.  The actions of Jewish believers remained consistent with their actions prior to the decision of the elders in Acts chapter fifteen.  For this reason, James requested that Paul participate with four men in the conclusion of their Nazarite vow so that “all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law,” (Acts 21:24).  Further, James reiterated the previous decision, “Concerning the Gentiles who have believed, we wrote, having decided that they should abstain from meat sacrifice to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication,” (Acts 21:25).  If there is any doubt, the position of James, the brother of Jesus, should be seen as having authority over Paul based on the hierarchy of the early church, to which Paul submitted himself. 

 

3)     Nowhere in the Gospel accounts, nor the Book of Acts, nor any of the epistles, are Jewish believers specifically directed to forsake the Law of Moses.  Any warning in the epistles against encumbering a believer under the greater burden of the commandments is directed solely toward Gentile believers coming into the faith, warning them against becoming Jewish proselytes.  According to Paul’s gospel, both Jew and Gentile are saved through the Messiah, “in Christ,” as Paul wrote, “You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus…There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus,” (Gal 3:26-28).  Paul’s words do not preclude physical differences or differences in obligation, because a slave is not the same as free, nor is a male the same as a female.  Just as a husband and wife can become “one” (Matt 19:5), while still maintaining their individuality, so also, Jewish believers and Gentile believers can be united “in Christ Jesus,” while at the same time unique in their lifestyles preserving their individual callings.  “Unity” does not mean “uniformity” in all aspects of worship. 

 

4)     Gentile believers were first called “Christians” at Antioch, (Acts 11:26), but Jewish believers were separately, and earlier, known as “the Way” (Acts 9:2), reflecting the words of Jesus, “I am the Way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me,” (John 14:6).  The name “Christians”, first applied to Gentiles believers at Antioch, but not Jewish believers.  Jewish believers continued to be called “the Way” ten years later when Paul spoke to Jews in Jerusalem, (Acts 22:4).  When Paul stood before Felix at Caesara, he admitted that “According to the Way which they call a sect I do serve the God of our fathers, believing everything that is in accordance with the Law and that is written in the Prophets,” (Acts 24:14, 24:22).  The fact that two separate and unique names co-existed for believers indicates that a difference of obligation remained between the two groups.  When twelve Jewish disciples of John the Baptist became believers in Ephesus, they were referred to as “the Way” (Acts 19:9, 19:23), despite the fact that these believers lived in a Gentile area, where Gentile believers were called “Christians” since the days of Paul’s first trip to Antioch, (Acts 11:26). 

 

5)     Unknown to most believers, Paul wrote, “This…rule I lay down in all the churches.  Was a man already circumcised when he was called?  He should not become uncircumcised.  Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing.  Keeping God’s commands is what counts.  Each person should remain in the situation they were in when God called them,” (1 Cor 7:17-20, NIV).  Why remain as called, because “the body is not made up of one part, but of many…(whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free),” (1 Cor 12:13-14).  This statement of Paul appears to be straight forward.  A believer who was called as a Jew, should remain a Jew, and a believer called when a Gentile, should remain as a Gentile.  A person remains Jewish by living a lifestyle of obedience to the commandments.  This understanding best explains why Paul circumcised the Jewish Timothy (Acts 16:3), but did not circumcise the Gentile Titus, (Gal 2:3).  To say that Paul was just being all things to all people, runs contrary to Paul’s own directive, “I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law,” (Gal 5:3).  If believers were to become either all Jewish or Gentile, than the argument would be for the former since Gentiles are grafted into the Jewish vine, (Rom 11:17).  If all believers are to become as Gentile, to what purpose does Paul speak when he wrote, “What advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision?  Much in every way.  To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God,” (Rom 3:1-2). 

 

It was a blessing to see everyone last week in Midland. - Scott