Galatians 3:24, 25: How can you say that the Law of Moses is still to be followed by Christians today, when it is quite clear that we are no longer under a tutor?

This entry has been reproduced from the forthcoming paperback edition of The New Testament Validates Torah (due sometime 2011)

Pastor: Galatians 3:24: The Law is our tutor to lead us to Christ.

“Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Messiah, so that we may be justified by faith.”

The pastor we are examining is correct when he asserts, “The Law is our tutor to lead us to Christ,” citing Galatians 3:24 as evidence. The challenge with his assertion, though, is not in the need for the Torah’s instruction—and our widespread human inability to keep it—to reveal our sin and point us to the Messiah and the eternal redemption He provides (i.e., Romans 10:4, Grk.). The problem is that (1) when the good news is declared in much of Christianity today, people are only told about the love of God but are often never told about the judgment that is pronounced upon them as sinners, precisely because they are condemned as Torah-breakers (cf. Isaiah 24:5-6). And, (2) it has become far more commonplace in examination of Galatians to read Galatians 3:22-25 from the perspective of it not speaking of individuals on the road to salvation, but instead of it speaking historically of the Jewish people keeping the Torah prior to the arrival of the Messiah—with the Torah only in temporary effect to be obeyed until His arrival. Scot McKnight summarizes the two interpretive options for Galatians 3:24:

“The first takes it in an educative function: ‘the law was our pedagogue to lead us to Christ.’ This view is a common, traditional view, which sees the law as pointing out our sins so we will cry out for God’s grace in Christ. But besides the fact that Paul is not talking here about ‘individual experience’ but rather about ‘salvation history,’ he does not teach in Galatians that this is the purpose of the law…The second view is therefore to be preferred: ‘the law was our pedagogue until Christ.’ This view is not only the majority view today but is also contextually more compatible.”[a]

McKnight is correct when he informs us that the majority view held among Galatians commentators is that Galatians 3:24 is to be read from the temporal perspective of the Torah being valid “until Christ came” (RSV/NRSV/ESV).[b] Only by reviewing Galatians 4:22-25 in total can we really evaluate whether an individual’s common experience in coming to faith in Yeshua or the condition of the Jewish people prior to the arrival of Yeshua is most textually compatible. This section of Paul’s letter to the Galatians begins with him informing his audience,

“But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Yeshua the Messiah [or, the faithfulness of Yeshua the Messiah][c] might be given to those who believe. But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed” (Galatians 3:22-23).

The negative problem that sin has caused has affected “all men” (NASB) or “the whole world” (NIV), ta panta (ta panta). People committing sin, and rejecting the Creator God and His ways, is by no means an exclusive First Century Jewish problem; it is a universal problem to all humanity (Romans 3:23). Bruce is correct to conclude, “As Gentiles and Jews are ‘confined under sin’ in v. 22, so Gentiles and Jews alike are ‘confined under law’ [in v. 23].”[d] All people are to be regarded as being “under sin” (hupo hamartian, upo amartian) and “under law” (hupo nomon, upo nomon). The verb to describe this condition is sugkleiō (sugkleiw), “to confine to specific limits, confine, imprison” (BDAG),[e] regarding how “we were confined under the law” (RSV) or “imprisoned and guarded under the law” (NRSV). All that Scripture (the Torah and the Prophets) can do for people is lay out God’s standard of holiness, righteousness, and proper conduct—yet because of the common mortal proclivity to disobey Him—the most that Scripture can really do is lock us up as prisoners.

Scripture, to be sure, is not the problem; sin without a definite solution is the problem. The only thing to be experienced in a condition where one is “under sin” and “under law” is to be jailed, as it were, in condemnation and guilt. Thankfully, Yeshua the Messiah has come on the scene, and via His sacrifice offers everyone freedom from this! But, Yeshua’s work is for “those who believe”; if one does not recognize Him as Lord and Savior, then the redemption He provides is ineffectual and such people remain “under sin” and “under law.”

At this point, though, many interpreters—in spite of how “the scripture has all men ‘imprisoned’ under the power of sin” (Galatians 3:22, Phillips New Testament)—opt for the continuing “we” statement made by Paul to regard only his fellow Jews, and not to all of his audience. So, when Paul says “before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed” (Galatians 3:23), such confinement was considered only a Jewish issue. The clause eis tēn mellousan pistin apokalupthēnai (eiß thn mellousan pistin apokalufqhnai), “to the faith about to be revealed” (YLT), is thought to be taken with a temporal force, with the proposition eis (eiß) to be viewed “to denote a certain point or limit of time” (LS),[f] hence the common rendering “until faith should be revealed” (RSV). The faith in view is undoubtedly the belief or trust to be placed in Yeshua and His redemptive work; being “confined under the law” (RSV), though, is thought to only be a Jewish issue, with the Messiah’s arrival now abolishing Moses’ Teaching.

In order to draw the conclusion that the preposition eis means “until,” a reader has to separate out “under sin” and “under law” as being two different ideas: “under sin” would mean the negative consequences of sin, but “under law” would mean Jews having to be Torah obedient (at least at one prior point in history). However, the symbiotic relationship that being “under sin” and “under law” have together—as being “under sin” results in being “under law” and subjected to the Torah’s penalties—is one which is constant and cannot be so easily separated as some interpreters think. Paul expresses in Romans 6:14-15, to a largely non-Jewish audience in Rome, “For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace. What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be!” Not only is the antithesis of being “under grace” being “under law,” but the “we” referred to would be all born again Believers who have recognized the Messiah Yeshua. All people are to be redeemed from being “under law.”

Alternatively, if Galatians 3:23 is approached from an individualistic perspective, the statement “before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed,” regards the status of all people who were once condemned by God’s Torah as sinners, locked up in some kind of condemnation state before salvation. We should agree with Hegg, who says “it seems most natural to understand the phrase ‘before the faith came’[g] to mean ‘before personal faith comes to those God saves.’”[h] Only when people are able to recognize the significance of Yeshua’s faithfulness to die as a permanent sacrifice for human sin, this reality of faith having arrived to them, can they then be shown the great revelation of how faith in the Savior is to significantly transform them and allow them to enter into the Father’s destiny for their lives. This is something that the Apostle Paul did not want his Galatian audience to forget: what it took to get them to truly arrive at the significant faith in the Lord that they possess.

While many would prefer to take the verb apokaluptō (apokaluptw) in Galatians 3:23 as regarding God’s plan in Yeshua “to be revealed” within salvation history, earlier in his letter Paul himself uses it to describe how “God, who had set me apart even from my mother's womb and called me through His grace, was pleased to reveal [apokaluptō] His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles…” (Galatians 1:15-16a). To have the importance of faith actually revealed to a newly saved person, who has just been freed from the guilt incurred by sin and Torah-breaking, is entirely consistent with how Paul himself was redeemed. The initial salvation experience of faith in Yeshua is to be followed with a person being shown even more how significant the Messiah’s work is. It is more appropriate to render the clause eis tēn mellousan pistin apokalupthēnai as something like: “to the faith intending[i] to be revealed” (my translation), that which is destined to manifest itself in the redeemed. Paul acknowledges the initial entry of Messiah faith in someone’s life, leading to a greater revelation of what faith in Him and who He is encompasses. The preposition eis (eiß) can notably also mean “to express relation, to or towards” (LS).[j] Paul later specifies how the power of the good news is to lead one from faith to faith, meaning that the significant revelation of faith in Yeshua naturally gets deeper after one has been forgiven of sin and grows in Him:

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation [to salvation, YLT; eis sōtērian, eiß swthrian] to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith [apokaluptetai ek pisteōs eis pistin, apokaluptetai ek pistewß eiß pistin]…” (Romans 1:16-17a).

A proper view of Galatians 3:23 recognizes that: (1) saving faith is to manifest itself in the life of a Believer, (2) because of such faith one is freed from the imprisoning condemnation of sin and being “under law,” and (3) this results in being revealed a greater significance of faith as growth in Messiah begins.

Having stated how those who are “under law,” locked up as condemned sinners, must have faith in Yeshua come into their lives—and consequently with the redeemed being shown the magnificent importance of such faith in Yeshua—Paul follows this by explaining a pre-Messiah function of the Torah:

“Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Messiah, so that we may be justified by faith” (Galatians 3:24, NASU).[k]

A majority of today’s interpreters take Galatians 3:24 as being a temporal function for Paul’s own Jewish people. From this perspective “our” means “Jewish,” and “the law was our custodian until Christ came” (RSV) or “the law was our disciplinarian until Christ came” (NRSV). The Torah was the Jewish “imprisoner,” so to speak, eis Christon (eiß Criston). Highly reflective of this view, and one who definitely believes that the Torah is not to be followed in the post-resurrection era, is Witherington, who concludes that “the Law as the pedagogue of God’s people lasted only until Christ came. Here eiß Criston is surely to be taken in a temporal and not a telic sense.”[l] Such an interpretation of Galatians 3:24 could lead one to conclude that Paul is a turncoat Jew, and he is saying that with the arrival of the Messiah that his own people do not have to observe the burden of having to keep any of the Law of Moses; it was, after all, only “until Christ.”[m]

Much of how we look at Galatians 3:24 is influenced by how we look at the role of the paidagōgos (paidagwgoß), which is invariably translated as “tutor” (NASU), “custodian” (RSV/CJB), “child-conductor” (YLT), “guardian” (HCSB), or “schoolmaster” (KJV), comparable to our English word “pedagogue.” Many examiners are in rightful agreement that “tutor” is not the best rendering for paidagōgos, as there is something specific to be understood from this term in antiquity. In Galatians 3:24, we actually see Paul using a classical Greek term to express a Jewish concept.[n] The paidagōgos was “Orig. ‘boy-leader’, the man, usu.[ally] a slave…whose duty it was to conduct a boy or youth…to and from school and to superintend his conduct gener.; he was not a ‘teacher’…When the young man became of age, the p[aidagwgoß] was no longer needed” (BDAG).[o] In a classical sense, the paidagōgos was a protector who was to guard young boys on their way to school until they reached a certain age. This “disciplinarian” (NRSV) or “guardian” (ESV) would try to instill within them a basic sense of who a responsible citizen was, until they arrived at a point when they were old enough to take care of themselves.

Within much of the ancient period, the paidagōgos had a widescale reputation for strictness. Betz indicates, “The figure of the pedagogue is looked upon as a hard but necessary instrument in bringing a person to achieve and realize virtue.”[p] So here, the Torah is not that much more than a merciless taskmaster that has to beat proper behavior into someone. Witherington is more tempered, remarking that this point of view “is much too one-sided. There were both bad and good pedagogues and the latter were not rarer exceptions to a rule.”[q] Paul is certainly not expecting his Galatian audience to apply all of the possible negative traits of a classical paidagōgos into his usage in Galatians 3:24.

While strict in terms of discipline, and while various interpreters would oppose this conclusion, the paidagōgos did have an important educational function. As Plato would describe it, “Our sharp-eyed and efficient supervisor of the education of the young must redirect their natural development along the right lines, by always setting them on the paths of goodness as embodied in the legal code” (Laws 7.809).[r] Dunn argues in favor of the paidagōgos, again while being strict, having a “responsibility to instruct in good manners, and to discipline and correct the youth when necessary.”[s] TDNT further remarks that the Torah “is a paedagōgós while we are minors. During our minority we are under it and virtually in the position of slaves. With faith, however, we achieve adult sonship and a new immediacy to the Father which is far better than dependence on even the best ‘pedagogue.’…It is a taskmaster with an educational role.”[t]

The related verb to paidagōgos is paideuō (paideuw), which can mean both “to provide instruction for informed and responsible living, educate” and “to assist in the development of a person’s ability to make appropriate choices, practice discipline” (BDAG).[u] Paideuō is often employed in the Septuagint to render the Hebrew yasar (rsy), meaning, “chastise, discipline, rebuke,” and “teach, train” (CHALOT).[v] It appears in Proverbs 29:19: “A slave will not be instructed [yasar] by words alone; for though he understands, there will be no response,” or “A stubborn servant will not be reproved [paideuō] by words: for even if he understands, still he will not obey” (LXE). Yet, even while the verb paideuō can relate to negative discipline or chastisement, it is used in the Apocrypha to represent the education of someone in the Tanach Scriptures:

·  “Therefore set your desire on my words; long for them, and you will be instructed [paideuō]...Therefore be instructed [paideuō] by my words, and you will profit” (Wisdom 6:11, 25).

·  “If you are willing, my son, you will be taught [paideuō], and if you apply yourself you will become clever” (Sirach 6:32).

Another related term to paidagōgos is paideia (paideia), regarding “the state of being brought up properly, training” (BDAG).[w] This notably appears in 2 Timothy 3:16, where Paul says “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training [paideia] in righteousness.” Also to be considered could be 4 Maccabees 1:17: “[There] is education [paideia] in the law[x], by which we learn divine matters reverently and human affairs to our advantage.”

Whether Galatians 3:24 should be understood in the context of the clause eis Christon meaning “to lead us to Christ” (NIV) or “until Christ came” (TNIV) is determined by the value judgment of a reader concluding whether or not the figure of the paidagōgos or pedagogue had any kind of educational role. No one can deny that the paidagōgos was a strict disciplinarian. While Witherington argues that “it was not unusual for the pedagogue to chide or even beat a child on occasion to achieve the desired form of behavior,” even he has to recognize “The pedgagogue did have a limited educational role…”[y] All are agreed that the Torah function as a pedagogue regards the issuance of condemnation to Torah-breakers, but does this condemnation stir up within condemned persons the need for them to cry out to the Messiah—or did the Torah only have a limited function in protecting the Jewish people until the Messiah’s arrival? The combined disciplinarian-educator can actually be seen when we compare Galatians 3:24 to 2 Timothy 3:14-16:

The Apostle Paul lauded Timothy for how he was raised by his mother and grandmother (2 Timothy 1:5) in the Tanach Scriptures, which are Holy Texts to be employed for paideian tēn en dikaiosunē (paideian thn en dikaiosunh), “training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16). The Torah and Tanach are going to train people in ways of righteousness, whether they are redeemed or unredeemed, and for the latter such training will undeniably involve chastisement. The Torah, Prophets, and Writings are going to always reveal a person’s innate need for a Divine Redeemer—One whom the Father has provided in His Son Yeshua (Jesus). Paul quite keenly says of the Tanach Scriptures, that they are “able to make you wise to salvation through belief in Messiah Yeshua” (my translation), eis sōtērian dia pisteōs tēs en Christō Iēsou (eiß swthrian dia pistewß thß en Cristw Ihsou). In 2 Timothy 3:15, the preposition eis involves Timothy’s training in the Tanach leading to his salvation.

There is no reason at all why the clause eis Christon (eiß Criston) cannot be viewed as “to Christ.” It is true that a version like the NASU has added some words in italics with “the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ” and the NKJV has the similar “the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ.” These words are justifiably added to recognize the appropriate preparatory role of the pedagogue: eis Christon, “to Christ”—which is comparable to eis sōtērian, “to salvation.” In Galatians 3:24 the perfect verb gegonen (gegonen) is used, indicating that the role of the Torah as pedagogue, while something done in the past, still has an ongoing effect for born again Believers. The Torah having once served a pedagogue for the redeemed—a strict disciplinarian for those who have now arrived at faith in Yeshua—does not allow for people to dispense with its instructions. When Matthew 1:21 informs Bible readers, “Now all this took place to fulfill [gegonen] what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet,” are we expected to throw away and ignore the Messianic prophecies now that they have been fulfilled via the Incarnation of Yeshua? Or are we to understand them in a new light?

There is every reason to recognize the validity of the Torah serving as the pedagogue leading individuals in need of salvation to the Messiah. Yet, even if we were to view Galatians 3:24 from the perspective of the Torah serving as a strict disciplinarian “until Christ,” meaning “until Christ came into our lives,” this should not automatically mean that God’s Law gets cast aside as unimportant. The function of the Torah as a pedagogue is over for those who recognize the Messiah, whether you render the clause eis Christon as “until Christ” or “to Christ.” Stott’s observations are well taken:

“[T]he oppressive work of the law was temporary, [but]…it was ultimately intended not to hurt but to bless. Its purpose was to shut us up in prison until Christ should set us free, or to put us under tutors until Christ should make us sons….Only Christ can deliver us from the prison to which the curse of the law has brought us, because He was made a curse for us. Only Christ can deliver us from the law’s harsh discipline, because He makes us sons who obey from love for their Father and are no longer naughty children needing tutors to punish them.”[z]

While some might want to argue against the view that the Torah is to serve as an individual’s pedagogue—concluding that the “we” Paul is speaking of in Galatians 3:24 is just “we Jews”—the Torah did indeed play a role in the non-Jewish Galatians’ own salvation experience. Paul’s visit to Southern Galatia in Acts chs. 13-14 reveals that he certainly taught about Yeshua from the Torah and Prophets to more than just Jews, observing that He provided a forgiveness from sins and freedom that the Torah could not provide (Acts 13:38-39, 43).

In various sectors of today’s Messianic movement, Galatians 3:24 has been viewed from the perspective of a young man or young woman being prepared for bar/bat mitzvah.[aa] In Judaism, boys and girls are taught the commandments of the Torah from their infancy. The commandments are rigorously instilled in them so that by the time they reach puberty, usually by the age of 12 or 13, one who goes through his bar/bat mitzvah recognizes that he is accountable for being a member of the Jewish community. While it is now traditional to hold festivities and parties for bar/bat mitzvah, the First Century historian Josephus recorded, “when I was a child, and about fourteen years of age, I was commended by all for the love I had to learning; on which account the high priests and principal men of the city came then frequently to me together, in order to know my opinion about the accurate understanding of points of the law” (Life 1.9).[bb] A major role in a bar/bat mitzvah ceremony (or even in a Protestant Christian denomination confirming a youth as a church member) is so that young people arrive at the point of being aware of their responsibilities before God, and that they have an understanding of the Scriptures.

The practice of preparing a youth for bar/bat mitzvah is to instill in the boy or girl the understanding that he or she is accountable for living up to the Torah’s standards. The Torah up to this point serves as the person’s tutor or schoolmaster, and hopefully when the youth gets up to the bema to read from the Torah scroll, he or she has an understanding that this is very serious in the eyes of the God of Israel. In a Messianic context, we surely hope that a young person undergoing bar/bat mitzvah has truly come to that moment where he or she realizes that the Torah is not enough, and that it is the Lord Yeshua to which its instructions inevitably point.

In the view of Galatians 3:24, God’s Law as pedagogue is to rigorously instill within us a sense of His holiness and righteousness, but our innate inability to ultimately keep its commandments perfectly should lead us to faith in the Messiah. When salvation from our sin comes, the key principles of God’s Torah are to certainly remain instilled with us. As we then grow and mature in such salvation, with the New Covenant promise of the Torah being supernaturally transcribed on our hearts now in play (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Ezekiel 36:25-27), we can fufill the Torah in emulation of Messiah Yeshua (Matthew 5:17-19), surely demonstrating it in action via good works of mercy and kindness toward others.

Pastor: Galatians 3:25: Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

“But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.”

While the pastor has chosen to look at the role of the Torah as preparatory for the Messiah, “to lead us to Christ” (Galatians 3:24, NASU), which is quite admirable given the scope of positions against it—he draws the further conclusion from Galatians 3:25, “Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.” Much of how we approach the meaning of hupo paidagōgon (upo paidagwgon) or “under a tutor” regards how we conclude what a paidagōgos actually is. The thought of many is that this means no longer being “under the supervision of the law” (NIV), and that God’s people should not be concerned about keeping God’s Law. Is this a valid approach to Galatians 3:25?

In the previous remarks on Galatians 3:24, we have described how the ancient classical figure of the paidagōgos is like a strict disciplinarian. While having an educational role for those on the road to saving faith, the paidagōgos is still going to condemn a person more often than not. Paul’s word “But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a pedagogue” (Galatians 3:25, my translation), should be understood from the perspective that after a person has arrived at salvation in the Messiah Yeshua, the Torah’s function as a paidagōgos is over. Bruce ably comments, “with the coming of faith believers have come of age and no longer require to be under the control of a slave-attendant: upo paidagwgon has the same sense as upo nomon in v. 23.”[cc] A fulfillment of the Torah in acts of love, focused around the fruit of the Spirit, is clearly to begin (Galatians 5:14-6:2). For the redeemed, the function of God’s Torah only condemning people with guilt because of their disobedience has ended.

In what context are born again Believers no longer “under a tutor”? If we are in the faith and have reached a point of spiritual maturity where we know what the Torah tells us is right and wrong, and we have repented of our sins and been spiritually regenerated, we have no need for the Torah to serve as a paidagōgos. We have no need for this kind of rigorous training, because if we have experienced the new birth we naturally want to obey our Heavenly Father through the empowerment of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit will convict us and remind us as we study the Scriptures, as we pray, and as we sincerely seek the Lord about what we should and should not be doing. For those truly saved and earnestly seeking the Lord, the Torah no longer serves as a schoolmaster, because we should be naturally following God’s commandments as an outward part of our walk of faith.

The Jewish philosopher Philo also expressed how “there is an undying law set up and established in the nature of the universe...that instruction is a salutary and saving thing, but that ignorance is the cause of disease and destruction” (On Drunkenness 141).[dd] The goal of any kind of instruction given by God is to be salvation, especially as human beings understand their limitations in light of His eternal holiness and perfection. And while it is most imperative for our mortal inability to fully obey the Lord to drive us to the cross of Yeshua in confession and repentance, instruction in sanctification is to truly follow being saved as the Holy Spirit takes up residence within us and transforms us to be more like Him. Some of this involves further discipline (1 Corinthians 11:32; Hebrews 12:6; cf. Proverbs 3:12) when we err, but it also involves opportunities for God’s people to simply demonstrate His good character to others (1 Thessalonians 2:10).

In order for the Law to have actually once functioned as an individual’s tutor or pedagogue: people have to know it. Where in mainstream Christianity today are the commandments of the Torah really taught to even lead people to faith? Are God’s commandments being taught in Sunday school so that the youth can know that they are sinners and that they need a Redeemer? Surely if they were in greater numbers than they currently are, some of the moral dilemmas that the contemporary Church faces would not be present. Unfortunately, the “salvation history” reading of Galatians 3:22-25 has done much of the current generation a serious disservice: Christian people are really not being instructed in the Law of Moses. The role that the Torah plays, or has played, in seeing Yeshua arrive onto the scene of history and into the lives of the redeemed—is not that appreciated. Hegg offers us some key observations:

“[I]n the metaphor Paul uses, when one has arrived at the teacher, one does not therefore despise the pedagogue who lead him there! If anything, one is more appreciative of the custodian because he has performed his duties faithfully. In the same way, when a sinner comes to realize that he is unable to remedy himself of his guilt, and when the Torah leads the sinner to Yeshua, the only remedy for sin, he is forever grateful for the role of the Torah in leading to Yeshua. Far from considering the Torah to have been worthless, he recognizes the strategic role it has played.”[ee]

Indeed, as redeemed Believers are no longer “under a tutor,” we should nonetheless be most grateful that the Torah-function as pedagogue has led us to the Divine Savior, Yeshua the Messiah. Following our salvation, we should demonstrate the appropriate respect, honor, and obedience that is due Moses’ Teaching.[ff]

updated 11 May, 2011

Galatians 5:2-3: I have encountered a Messianic Jewish teaching that states that only the Jewish people are obligated to keep Torah, because they are circumcised. Is this what Galatians 5:2-3 really communicates? I am confused.

“Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Messiah will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law” (Galatians 5:2-3).

It is true that in various sectors of Messianic Judaism, particularly those which promote a bilateral ecclesiology of the Kingdom of God composing two sub-groups of elect, Israel and “the Church,” that it is believed that only Jewish people are really supposed to follow the Torah. Non-Jewish Believers can keep the Torah if they wish, but it is not required or really expected of them.[a] Galatians 5:2-3 is offered as a proof text in support of this position, as the non-Jewish Galatians who would be circumcised in the First Century, would apparently make themselves obligated, the same as any Jew, to keep the Torah.

Is this interpretation of Galatians 5:2-3, a viable one? According to one rather popular Messianic teacher, at least: “Galatians 5:3 is irrefutably simple to understand.” He goes on to conclude, “If the plain meaning of the text is true” then “every person who is not Jewish is not obligated to keep the whole Torah.”[b] When one encounters any remark or statement, by any Bible teacher, on any topic, to the effect that something is “irrefutably simple,” “airtight,” “watertight,” or “fireproof”—be careful because this is a very good indication that there has not been enough detailed examination of the subject.[c] What is required, for adequately evaluating what Galatians 5:2-3 communicates, is not only placing these two verses within a wider scope of statements seen in Paul’s letter, but going into more detail from the Greek source text and adequately triangulating a variety of scholastic perspectives.

Is it possible that the Messianic Jewish view of only the Jewish people being “obligated” to keep the Torah, based on Galatians 5:2-3, has not probed the text enough? Galatians 5:2-3 are actually not easy verses to evaluate, partially because Paul says “I testify again…,” a clue that he could be repeating remarks previously made when he visited the Galatians in person (cf. Acts 13:13-14:28). In Galatians 5:2-3, we are certainly reading the Galatians’ mail, and are injecting ourselves into an ancient problem.

Textually speaking from the English alone, the immediate cotext of Galatians 5:1, 4, gives us some important clues as to the setting Paul addresses, regarding why he is insistent that the non-Jewish Galatians do not go through circumcision:

“It was for freedom that Messiah set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery. Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Messiah will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. You have been severed from Messiah, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.”

Galatians 5:1, 4 indicates that the issue in view is the non-Jewish Galatians having been freed from slavery to sin, and by going through circumcision, they would be returning to a spiritual condition that they should have left behind in paganism (cf. Galatians 4:8).[d] While in other places in Galatians, it is easily discerned that the “justification” in view regards one’s identity as a member of God’s people (Galatians 2:15), the “justification” seen in Galatians 5:4 has to regard the Galatians’ salvation status as well. Those Galatians, who would go through circumcision, are to be considered as having fallen from grace.

One significant feature of the “circumcision” (Grk. verb peritemnō, peritemnw) referenced throughout much of Galatians—but most specifically here—is how those of both the male and female genders are in view. Galatians 5:3 says, panti anthrōpō peritemnomenō (panti anqrwpw peritemnomenw). While it may seem rather strange to us, this clause is best rendered with “every human being who receives circumcision,” as the generic anthrōpos (anqrwpoß) for humankind is employed. Realizing that both the male and female genders are in view, the “circumcision” spoken of throughout much of Galatians has very little to do with a medical operation on the glans penis, but instead has to do with the ritual of an ancient proselyte to Judaism. “Circumcision” in Galatians may largely be considered a shorthand way of Paul saying: “become a Jewish proselyte/convert.” Becoming an ancient proselyte to Judaism involved circumcision, water immersion, and the presentation of an offering (b.Keritot 9a).[e] Females becoming Jewish proselytes partook of the latter two.

Interpreters of various positions on Galatians 5:1-4 should be able to recognize that the Apostle Paul is not criticizing circumcision as a medical practice here. What Paul is directly going after, though, is an inappropriate theology of circumcision present within much of First Century Judaism. Being ritually circumcised as a proselyte to Judaism, will not merit one a proper standing before the Creator God. Yet, the Judaizers/Influencers, who had been agitating the non-Jewish Galatians, did advocate that becoming a Jewish proselyte was necessary to be a genuine part of the people of God, and possess eternal salvation (cf. Acts 15:1).

A standard position that is seen of Galatians 5:2-3, only slightly modified by some leaders in today’s Messianic Jewish movement, is that the non-Jewish Galatians being circumcised would make them be obligated to keep the Torah. This is something witnessed in the views of Galatians commentators:

·  F.F. Bruce: “Circumcision as a minor surgical operation is neither here nor there, but circumcision voluntarily undertaken as a legal obligation carries with it a further obligation—nothing less than the obligation to keep the whole law. He who submits to circumcision as a legal requirement, necessary for salvation, accepts thereby the principle of salvation by law-keeping, and salvation by law-keeping implies salvation by keeping the whole law.”[f]

·  Richard N. Longenecker: “Paul wants to make it plain that with circumcision comes obligation ‘to obey the whole law.’”[g]

There are interpreters who hold the doing of the Torah in Galatians 5:3 as a matter of what identified ancient Jews,[h] and various others who will look at the doing of the Torah in Galatians 5:3 as a matter of the non-Jewish Galatians trying to earn their salvation. The correct interpretation of Galatians 5:3, regarding the matter of the Torah, has to weigh Paul’s rather severe warning of telling the non-Jewish Galatians that they will be cut off from grace (Galatians 5:4). The doing of the Torah in Galatians 5:3, as only some matter of obligated Jewish identity, does not at all serve as an adequate counterweight to being cut off from grace or salvation. A loss of God’s favor present in Yeshua’s sacrifice is in view.

Examining the statement, “I testify again to every man who receives circumcision that he is bound to keep the whole law” (Galatians 5:3, RSV), there have been some key suggestions made that the language employed here might have to do with some kind of oath taking. Hans Dieter Betz observes, “The formula of oath seems to be in place because of the stubbornness of the Galatians who, in spite of what they have been told before, remain naive with regard to the implications of becoming circumcised.”[i] Ben Witherington III also indicates how “A close examination of Ancient Near East covenanting procedures, including those followed by the Israelites, shows that the sign of the covenant was often connected with the oath curse that went with the covenant, in fact symbolized the curses that applied if one didn’t obey the covenant stipulations.”[j] Both Betz and Witherington have interjected some thoughts into what Galatians 5:3 may involve, which can better aid us in understanding why the non-Jewish Galatians being circumcised as proselytes, would be tantamount to them being cut off from God’s grace in Yeshua.

What if Galatians 5:3 includes an echo of a kind of oath that proselytes to Judaism would have been forced to take, in order for them to be steadfastly committed to keeping the whole Law? This certainly does have a precedent, as the returned Jewish exiles from Babylon made a public commitment to not only keep the Torah, but actually be cursed, if they were ever found disobeying any of its instructions:

“Now the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites, the gatekeepers, the singers, the temple servants and all those who had separated themselves from the peoples of the lands to the law of God, their wives, their sons and their daughters, all those who had knowledge and understanding, are joining with their kinsmen, their nobles, and are taking on themselves a curse and an oath to walk in God's law, which was given through Moses, God's servant, and to keep and to observe all the commandments of GOD our Lord, and His ordinances and His statutes” (Nehemiah 10:28-29).

For the First Century Jewish Synagogue, it is not difficult at all to envision various religious authorities requiring proselytes to make a vow to keep the whole Torah, and in the process for such proselytes to acknowledge curses crashing down upon them for breaking it in any way. Given the significance that many of today’s Pauline scholars have given to Paul’s usage of “works of law” in Galatians (2:16 [3x]; 3:2, 5, 10) and the Qumran document 4QMMT,[k] it should not be surprising that the Qumran community required its members to make an oath to keep the Torah of Moses, and in the process be reminded that God’s wrath would come down upon any of those who would break it:

“These are the regulations that govern when they are gathered together as a community. Every initiant into the society of the Yahad is to enter the Covenant in full view of all the volunteers. He shall take upon himself a binding oath to return to the Law of Moses (according to all that He commanded) with all his heart and with all his mind, to all that has been revealed from it to the Sons of Zadok—priests and preservers of the covenant, seekers of His will—and the majority of the men of their Covenant (that is, those who have jointly volunteered for His truth and to live by what pleases Him). Each one who thus enters the Covenant by oath is to separate himself from all of the perverse men, those who walk in the wicked way, for such are not reckoned a part of His Covenant. They ‘have not sought Him nor inquired of His statutes’ (Zeph. 1:6) so as to discover the hidden laws in which they err to their shame. Even the revealed laws they knowingly transgress, thus stirring God’s judgmental wrath and full vengeance: the curses of the Mosaic Covenant. He will bring against them weighty judgments, eternal destruction with none spared” (1QS 5.7-13).[l]

It is entirely reasonable to propose that Galatians 5:3 includes an embedded reference to some kind of oath for ancient Jewish proselytes to keep “the whole Law” (holon ton nomon, olon ton nomon). The proselyte procedures the non-Jewish Galatians would go through, would be administered by non-Messianic authorities, people who did not believe in Yeshua and would not take into consideration the new status of human beings in Him (Galatians 3:28). (The Influencers’ error themselves, as addressed throughout the Epistle to the Galatians, was in making ritual proselyte circumcision an issue for entry into God’s people, and not faith in the Messiah and His accomplishments.) And in the case of whatever sect of ancient Judaism may have been administrating the proselyte circumcision procedure, Betz notes that to the Qumran community “keeping the whole Torah meant for them additional requirements, which made their observance more radical than that of ordinary Jews.”[m] More than just observing commandments of the Pentateuch proper, with “the whole Law,” could be intended.

While being ritually circumcised as a Jewish proselyte, and in the process making an oath to keep the whole Torah, could very well be what is more fully involved in Galatians 5:3—why would Paul be so strident to tell the non-Jewish Galatians: “you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace” (Galatians 5:4; cf. 2:21)? He could have just said something to the effect, “You are misguided” or “You are deceived” or “You have gone astray” here, because being circumcised is surely a Torah commandment—and one which Paul himself says later has value (cf. Romans 2:25; 3:1-2).

An extremely important, albeit quite obvious component, to properly understanding Galatians 5:3, “he is under obligation to keep the whole Law” (NASU), is actually reading what the Greek source text says: hoti opheiletēs estin holon ton nomon poiēsai (oti ofeilethß estin olon ton nomon poihsai). While most contemporary English translations have something along the lines of “under obligation” (NASU) or “obligated” (NIV/NRSV/ESV/HCSB), these renderings communicate the sense of a verb, when a noun is actually what appears in the source text. While Jews and Messianic Jews being “obligated to keep Torah,” has become a prolific sound byte in some quarters, based on Galatians 5:3—what if “under obligation” is not at all the best translation for what is witnessed in the Greek source text? Not enough interpreters have not adequately examined what the Greek actually says.

The Greek noun opheiletēs (ofeilethß), in its most basic sense, means “a debtor” (LS).[n] While it can mean “one who is under obligation in a moral or social sense,” it can also mean “one who is in debt in a monetary sense,” as well as “one who is guilty of a misdeed, one who is culpable, at fault,” “in relation to God, sinner” (BDAG).[o] The term opheiletēs appears in Matthew 6:12, where Yeshua directs His disciples to pray, “And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.” In the view of TDNT, “those who accept circumcision are debtors to the whole law,”[p] and no one can deny how in the KJV/NKJV, opheiletēs is translated with “debtor”: “that he is a debtor to do/keep the whole law.”[q]

The proper rendering of opheiletēs as “debtor” makes good sense, in light of the inference that the non-Jewish Galatians who are circumcised as proselytes will fall from grace. Their motives are clear: they “are seeking to be justified by law [lit. ‘in law’; en nomō, en nomw]” (Galatians 5:4). Does this mean that these people will find themselves no longer seeking justification in the Messiah and what He has accomplished? It has to mean this, in order for their circumcision to merit their being cut off from God’s grace in Yeshua. If membership in God’s people via ritual proselyte circumcision were only in view in Galatians 5:2-3, then one would expect the Galatians being accused of only being misguided or deceived. Most critical to be recognized, is how the condition of a “debtor” in the Apostolic Scriptures, is often that of a person who lives in an unredeemed condition of sin and guilt. James D.G. Dunn notes, “The play on words between verses 2 and 3 should be noted: Christ will not benefit them (ōphēlesei [wfelhsei]), but, instead, they will be in debt (opheiletēs [ofeilethß]) to the law.”[r]

A picture of Galatians 5:2-3 should be forming, which has: adequately taken into consideration First Century Jewish background, the Greek source text, and the reality that the non-Jewish Galatians who become ritually circumcised as proselytes will be cut off from God’s grace in Yeshua. Consider this interpretation of Galatians 5:2-3:

1.  The “circumcision” in view has been required by the Judaizers/Influencers in order for the Galatians to be “really” reckoned as members of God’s people.

2.  Paul says that if the Galatians go through with this, then they will be regarded as debtors to keep the whole Torah.

3.  Being a debtor to the Torah, could very well have involved some kind of a loyalty oath that the proselyte would have to exclaim, something with precedents witnessed in Jewish history. One who is found to break the Torah then (cf. James 2:10), as a debtor, would call God’s curses and wrath down.

4.  Why would being regarded as a “debtor to do the Torah,” merit being cut off from God’s grace in Yeshua? Because in Yeshua, born again Believers are to no longer be regarded as such debtors. He has freed all redeemed men and women from the curse of the Torah declared upon Torah-breakers (Galatians 3:13). To regard oneself as some kind of “debtor to do the Torah,” and if found breaking the Torah incur its curse, would be tantamount to the Galatians saying that Yeshua had not really broken the curse of Torah-breaking via His salvation.

Galatians 5:2-3 are loaded First Century words, which were delivered by the Apostle Paul to severely dissuade the non-Jewish Galatians from becoming ritual proselytes to Judaism. The reason he says “You have been severed from Messiah, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace” (Galatians 5:4), is because Paul knows that in becoming proselytes, they will make themselves into debtors to keep the Torah. In going through the proselyte procedure (cf. Galatians 3:10), they will have likely declared that the curses of the Torah come down upon them if they ever break it—which would run contrary to Yeshua’s sacrifice having canceled the Torah’s curse (Galatians 3:13).[s] The spiritual center of who these people are will become focused on justification via the Torah—not Yeshua the Messiah and a steadfast reliance on what He has accomplished. In going through the proselyte procedure, the non-Jewish Galatians will accept a premise of salvation-by-ethnicity (m.Sanhedrin 10:1), and all of the requirements demanded by a non-Messianic Jewish community—which will accrue to them as a form of spiritual debt, which can never be nullified as they will be cut off from Messiah.

No one, however—including a Jewish Believer—is to be regarded as a “debtor to do the Torah,” because as Paul had said earlier to those in Galatia, “Through [the Messiah] everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses” (Acts 13:39, NIV).[t]

It should be obvious that the Messianic Jewish idea one may hear of Jews and Messianic Jews being “obligated” to keep the Torah, which is likely to claim Galatians 5:2-3 as support, has not investigated the original context and setting of these verses thoroughly enough. If as proposed, “debtor” is the correct rendering of opheiletēs (ofeilethß), and this depicts a condition of one being a sinner without regeneration via the gospel—then no one, Jewish or otherwise, wants to be in the situation depicted by Galatians 5:1-4 of having to be in slavery and be cut off from Yeshua.

While historically, verses like Galatians 5:1-4 have been interpreted as the Apostle Paul speaking against the continued validity of the Torah for the post-resurrection era, the targeted issue is actually making sure that one is not “a debtor to do the Law.” While the Epistle to the Galatians is clear that God’s Torah is not to be regarded as a means of justification, we can be agreed that all born again Believers following ton nomon tou Christou (ton nomon tou Cristou), “the law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2), which the CJB rightly extrapolates to be “the Torah's true meaning, which the Messiah upholds.” This is to be focused around Yeshua’s teaching on Moses’ Teaching, principally found in His Sermon on the Mount (Matthew chs. 5-7). Yeshua the Messiah came to fulfill the Torah, He directed His followers to keep it (Matthew 5:17-19), and Paul says in Galatians that we are to fulfill the Torah with love for neighbor being paramount (Galatians 5:14; cf. Leviticus 19:18).

While there has been a significantly polarized debate in various sectors of the Messianic movement, as to whether or not non-Jewish Believers are “obligated to keep Torah,” Romans 8:12-13 guides us in another direction: “brethren, we are debtors [opheiletia, ofeiletai], not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh—for if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body you will live” (RSV). Born again Believers, regenerated by the Spirit, are not to be regarded as “debtors to keep Torah.” They are instead “debtors” to grand work of Yeshua the Messiah (Romans 8:11). As Romans 13:8 says, “Owe nothing [Grk. verb opheilō, ofeilw] to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.” Being in Yeshua, regenerated men and women are to have the clear presence of the Holy Spirit within them, but as “debtors” to the Lord and His work, they have no debt of sin from Torah-breaking that needs to be paid any longer—the only “debt” that they are to have is one of love toward God and neighbor, the foremost of the commandments.[u]

Those in Messiah are all certainly expected to obey Moses’ Teaching, but the responsibility of such obedience is with the definite aid of the Spirit infilling their hearts and minds, and is surely guided by the impetus of love. Those who are in Messiah and have been spiritually regenerated, are to be regarded as people of the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Ezekiel 36:25-27; Hebrews 8:8-12; 10:16-17)[v] He has inaugurated (Luke 22:20). This includes the promise not only of a permanent atonement for sin and forgiveness—releasing redeemed people from being “debtors to do the Torah”—but in the place of being a debtor, the New Covenant promises to provide a definite supernatural compulsion to obey, which only being “a debtor to do Torah” (cf. Galatians 5:3) would surely not bring. As Romans 8:1-4 says,

“Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Messiah Yeshua. For the law of the Spirit of life in Messiah Yeshua has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.”

Those who walk in the Spirit, should naturally be those who keep God’s Torah.[w] Rather than being in slavery (Galatians 5:1), one should consider how James the Just says, “But one who looks intently at the perfect law, the law of liberty, and abides by it, not having become a forgetful hearer but an effectual doer, this man will be blessed in what he does” (James 1:25). Following the Torah as one who has been freed from sin in the Messiah Yeshua, is quite different than following the Torah as one who is to be regarded as a debtor.

Can Galatians 5:2-3 be used to imply that within the Messianic movement today, only Messianic Jews have a real requirement incumbent upon them to keep the Torah, and non-Jewish Believers do not? No one should argue against how Messianic Jews might feel more comfortable and have fewer obstacles, keeping many parts of the Torah (i.e., those areas that much of Protestantism has classified as the so-called “ceremonial law”), given the fact that it is a definite component of not only their spiritual heritage, but their ethnic heritage. The real stakes, though, about following the Torah—and the deplorable complimentarian trend witnessed in various Messianic sectors, on distinctions to be rigidly maintained (and enforced) among God’s people[x]—have a great deal to do with the universal availability of all people on Earth to receive God’s Spirit.

If all of the redeemed in Yeshua are to receive salvation and the gift of the Holy Spirit, then an obedience to the commandments of the Torah, compelled on by the Spirit, should naturally follow. (Much of this obviously has to occur and be facilitated within the right, local community of Believers—which in some places may be [significantly] lacking.) Yet, with some Messianic Jews claiming that non-Jewish Believers should really not be keeping the Torah, this could be taken as a nullification of the Lord’s decree, “I will pour out my spirit on all flesh [kol-basar, rfB-lK]” (Joel 2:28, RSV). Is the Holy Spirit supposed to write God’s commandments on only some of His people, or all of His people? The answers to this question, in the short term, unfortunately, are likely to divide more and more teachers and leaders, than bring them closer together.

NOTES

posted 01 August, 2011

Genesis 5, 11 Genealogies: I have heard that there is some kind of controversy concerning the genealogical lists of Genesis 5 and 11. Can you explain this?

Whether one realizes it or not, the genealogical lists of the anti-diluvians of Genesis 5, and the post-diluvians of Genesis 11, are two of the most debated chapters in the entire Bible. People engaged in Biblical Studies cannot often agree on who these people were and what the numbers of their ages represent. The Rabbinic tradition is largely convinced that each list simply represents a line of precisely ten people who lived from Adam to Noah, and precisely ten people who lived from Noah to Abraham (m.Avot 5:2). Advocates of either a 6,000 year chronology for human history, or even 6,000 year old universe, go a step further and add up the numbers provided in Genesis 5 and 11, believing that these lists strongly support their case. But those wishing to examine the genealogical lists from an Ancient Near Eastern perspective have often opposed this.

First to be considered is the strong likelihood of Genesis 5 and 11 having employed a process known as telescoping. While we would expect a precise correlation between fathers, sons, grandsons, great-grandsons, etc., today in the Twenty-First Century, genealogies seen throughout Scripture are often given to make an important point with the people that are listed, and may not be as exact as the modern person would want them to be. Our modern expectations regarding genealogy are much different from what is seen in the Tanach. It is common in the Tanach to see telescoped genealogies that purposefully skip generations in order for a Biblical author to make an important theological point, or to draw one’s attention to the people actually listed (i.e., the genealogy of Ezra the Priest: 1 Chronicles 6:3-15 compared to Ezra 7:1-15, the latter excludes six people).

Both the genealogies of Genesis 5 from Adam to Noah, and of Genesis 11 from Noah to Abraham, list “ten” generations. K.A. Kitchen describes, “there is…symmetry of ten generations before the Flood and ten generations after the Flood. With this, one may compare the three series of fourteen generations in Matthew’s genealogy of Christ…which is known to be selective, and not wholly continuous.”[a] The common formula A begot B need not always imply direct parenthood, as it could indicate the genealogical link between a great-great-great grandfather and a great-great-great grandson, or even some more separated link. Yeshua the Messiah as the Son of David is the Son of David because He is David’s distant descendant, not his immediate descendant, and there is definite telescoping in His genealogies seen in Matthew 1 and Luke 3.

Jewish scholar Nahum M. Sarna concurs, “There is reason to believe that the ten-generation pattern for genealogies was favored by Western Semites in general and that the convention left its mark on the historiography of Israel.”[b] Thus, the number “ten” in the Ancient Near East brought with it an aura of distinction (perhaps royal distinction), designed in Genesis 5 and 11 to give some “high points” of individuals who lived between Adam and Noah, and then Noah and Abraham—but by no means are all of the generations of people between Adam and Noah, and then Noah and Abraham, recorded on these lists.

It is not uncommon at all in certain circles, largely uninformed from ANE data, to see people actually add up the numbers of the Genesis 5 and 11 genealogies. This includes a great deal of today’s Messianic community. Walter C. Kasier, though, issues an important warning:

“[D]o not add up the years of these patriarchs in Genesis 5 and 11 and expect to come up with the Bible’s date for the birth of the human race. The reason for this warning is clear: the Bible never adds up these numbers…[I]n Genesis 5 and 11 the writer does not employ his numbers for this purpose; neither should we.”[c]

Kitchen likewise says, “one cannot use these genealogies to fix the date of the Flood or of earliest Man.”[d]

Even if one decides to add up the numbers of Genesis 5 and 11, trying to determine a chronology for human history, what numbers are to be added up? When examining the witnesses of the Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT), Greek Septuagint (LXX), and Samaritan Pentateuch—there is variance among the numbers that appear. R.K. Harrison summarizes the differences in three distinct charts, from his Introduction to the Old Testament:[e]

It is obvious that there are differences between the Genesis 5 and 11 numbers as seen in the MT, LXX, and the Sam. P. Adding up the numbers is by no means something easy when these variants are considered.

Many continue to appeal to the work of Seventeenth Century Archbishop James Ussher, who determined that the Earth was actually created in 4004 B.C.E. Yet as Harrison aptly notes, “The system devised by Usher depended inferentially upon the supposition that the Old Testament genealogies did not omit any names, and that the periods of time mentioned in the text were consecutive, assumptions that have been proved to be entirely gratuitous.”[f] The Rabbinic tradition has often made the similar mistake. Now armed with the proper ANE background,[g] we should not assume that the genealogical lists of Genesis 5 & 11 intend to give us a chronology of early man.

What the Genesis 5 and 11 genealogies do give us is a snapshot of some of the people who lived before, and then after, the Flood. It indicates that these people lived a very long time, and they were so important that their names appear in the Biblical text. They were real people and not figments of someone’s imagination—but their ages are not given to us to try to determine when Adam was created or to fix the date of the Flood. The lists of Genesis 5 and 11 are also not given to us to try to calculate the day of Yeshua’s Second Coming. The Genesis 5 and 11 genealogies simply give a testament to the consistency of God’s command “Be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28). And we are reminded once again, the Biblical text itself makes no attempt to calculate the sum of their ages, whatever those ages may actually be.

(For a further discussion of some related issues, consult the FAQ entries “6,000 Year Teaching” and “Creationism.”)

NOTES

posted 16 April, 2008

Globalization: What is your opinion of globalization? Do you believe that there will be a one-world government?

We do believe that in fulfillment of end-time prophecy that there will be a one-world government one day. How soon that will be is hard to tell. The logistics of including third-world and lesser developed countries into a global union are immense, especially considering all the infrastructure such a world government demands. In the meantime, however, globalization does offer us as Believers the excellent opportunity to communicate and travel easily, and new technologies that can spread the gospel and train others in God’s Word should be utilized as long as they can.

updated 24 April, 2006

God, Depicted as Male: Why is God depicted as male in the Scriptures? Has this not been a cause of abusive behavior of men toward women?

The inclusive language debate over the past few years is a direct result of feminist theology, almost to the point where God is referred to as a he/she in some theological works and liberal seminaries. Certainly, none of us can deny the fact that over the centuries of both Judaism and Christianity women have not always been appreciated, and sometimes even denigrated and dominated by men. This is unfortunate, because both the Gospels and the Book of Acts portray men and women as having equal importance in the eyes of God. Yeshua treated women with kindness and respect, as should any man today. Women, just as men, have a role to play in the home and in the community of faith. In Eden, Adam and Eve were equals.

Ultimately, God as a spiritual being has no gender, but God’s depiction as male throughout the Scriptures must be kept in the context of the Ancient Near East and the competing Creation accounts to the one we see in Genesis 1-3. In Genesis 1-3, God makes the world as a paradise and forms human beings as not only the groundskeepers of that paradise—but they are made for communion with the Divine. This is contrary to the Sumerian Enuma elish epic, where humans are made entirely to be slaves of the gods—and certainly not to commune with them.

What is perhaps more important to consider is the fact that most Ancient Near Eastern myths regarding Creation have the universe being formed out of the union of a male god and female goddess out of pre-existent matter. Planet Earth is the “child,” if you will, of a sexual act between a god and goddess—having been birthed by a mother. The Hebrew depiction of God as a male stands profoundly against such beliefs, as males cannot give birth. The Genesis 1-3 Creation account depicts God as male because He created the world out of nothing, creatio ex nihilo—not as the result of some super-human (possibly even “highly evolved”) beings manipulating matter to make the Earth. This is affirmed by the author of Hebrews:

“By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible” (Hebrews 11:3).

We would do well to understand the origins of why the authors of Scripture depict God as masculine. Is this because God despises the feminine gender and wants women to be in total servitude to men? No. God does want women in today’s Body of Messiah to fulfill their unique callings, just as God wants men to fulfill their unique callings. This is undoubtedly difficult with the rise of feminism, and what can frequently be a backlash of some men asserting a strong domination over women. Consequently, today’s Messianic community has much to discuss and consider when we read the Torah in its Ancient Near Eastern context, as well as other issues concerning the sexes that will come from examining other parts of the Bible and returning to the egalitarian ideal as seen in Genesis 1-3.

posted 04 January, 2007

God and Lord, Pagan Titles: Why does your ministry use the terms “God” and “Lord” for YHWH, when these are well documented terms used in ancient paganism?

It is notable that many people who use the Divine Name in sectors of the Messianic movement tend to forget that our Father has many titles that are used complimentary and independently of the name YHWH. In the Hebrew Scriptures, the most notable titles that are used are Elohim (~yhla) and Adonai (ynda). In the Greek Scriptures, their counterparts are Theos (qeoß) and Kurios (kurioß). These titles in English correspond to “God” and “Lord.”

Sacred Name Only advocates often have a field day in attacking people who use the titles God and Lord. It is often said that these words are of pagan origin and should have no place whatsoever in the vocabulary of a Believer. This claim is made on the basis that God and Lord have also been titles of pagan deities. This claim is made even more so for the Greek titles Kurios and Theos, which were used in Ancient Greek as titles for the deities of Mount Olympus. However, arguments against Kurios and Theos significantly lose weight when we see that the Jewish Rabbis who translated the Hebrew Tanach into Greek had no problem using them in reference to the Holy One of Israel. In fact, when the Apostles went into Greek-speaking lands, this is exactly what they called the God of Israel.

It is not uncommon at all for many in today’s Messianic movement to perceive of the Hebrew language as being “holy tongue.” This is based on a misunderstanding of Zephaniah 3:9, where the Prophet says “I will give to the peoples purified lips” or safar beruah (hrWrb hpf). To assume that this means that the peoples will be given an ability to speak Hebrew is not an honest assessment of the Book of Zephaniah, as the previous verses tell us exactly what the problem of Ancient Israel has been:

“Woe to her who is rebellious and defiled, the tyrannical city! She heeded no voice, she accepted no instruction. She did not trust in the LORD, she did not draw near to her God. Her princes within her are roaring lions, Her judges are wolves at evening; they leave nothing for the morning. Her prophets are reckless, treacherous men; her priests have profaned the sanctuary. They have done violence to the law. The LORD is righteous within her; He will do no injustice. Every morning He brings His justice to light; He does not fail. But the unjust knows no shame. I have cut off nations; their corner towers are in ruins. I have made their streets desolate, with no one passing by; their cities are laid waste, without a man, without an inhabitant. I said, ‘Surely you will revere Me, accept instruction.’ So her dwelling will not be cut off according to all that I have appointed concerning her. But they were eager to corrupt all their deeds” (Zephaniah 3:1-7).

Being given “purified lips” is undoubtedly connected with moving from a state of sinfulness to a state of holiness—from a state of profanity to a state of purity. Zephaniah’s prophecy of “I will make the peoples pure of speech” (NJPS) is akin to the Apostle Paul’s later instruction, “Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear” (Ephesians 4:29). The “purified lips” pertains to a manner of speech by which our Father’s people will be able to serve Him.

While the Hebrew language certainly has great beauty—it is still a human language (and in many cases a primitive language, with limited vocabulary, at that). And perhaps most significantly, Hebrew is an Ancient Near Eastern language with relatives such as Aramaic, Akkadian, and Ugaritic. Yet this is not understood by many teachers in today’s Messianic movement, who assume that Hebrew is a holy language and every other language is unholy. Such a misunderstanding can lead to ridiculous conclusions such as,

“The Set-apart Spirit, inspiring all Scripture, would most certainly not have transgressed the Law of Yahuweh by ‘inspiring’ the Messianic Scriptures in a language riddled with the names of Greek deities and freely using the names of these deities in the text, no way!”[a]

Here, because common nouns in Greek are also attested to be used as names of Greek deities, the Greek Scriptures are assumed to obviously not be inspired of the Almighty. This has led to a number of people doubting the message of the gospel, and leaving faith in Yeshua the Messiah.

But what happens if we were to apply this logic equally to the Hebrew Scriptures? Terms common to Hebrew used as the proper names of pagan gods in languages such as Ugaritic—including the terms El (la) and Elohim (~yhla)—which are applied to YHWH in the Tanach. (Consult the editor’s article “The Song of Moses and God’s Mission for His People.”) If such a standard as proposed were applied to the whole of Scripture, neither the Hebrew Tanach nor Greek Messianic Writings could be considered inspired, as both languages include common vocabulary words used to refer to pagan deities. Are today’s Messianics ready to start reading the Tanach against its Ancient Near Eastern context? This has certainly been a significantly deficient area of our Biblical Studies.

If we are to reject titles such as God and Lord because they might be used to refer to pagan deities, then we must hold the Hebrew titles of Elohim and Adonai to the exact same standard. Not surprisingly, both of these titles have been used to refer to pagan deities every bit as much as the deity YHWH. TWOT explains that El (la), the singular form of Elohim, “is a very ancient Semitic term. It is also the most widely distributed name among Semitic-speaking peoples for the deity, occurring in some form in every Semitic language, except Ethiopic.”[b] So, if we are to reject God and Lord as titles, we must do the same for Elohim because Elohim is used to refer to pagan deities, and El is used in almost every Semitic language to refer to deities other than YHWH.

But it even goes beyond this. A shortened poetic form of “Yahweh,” Yah (Hy), which appears in the Hebrew Tanach, was possibly used by pagan societies that pre-dated the Israelites. The IVPBBC tells us, “There are a number of possible occurrences of Yahweh or Yah as a deity’s name outside of Israel, though all are debatable.”[c] Yet even if true, we certainly do not conclude that YHWH is a pagan name because the pagans may have used derivations of it. Furthermore, in 2 Samuel 5:20, David describes the God of Israel as Ba’al (l[B), which was the name of a Canaanite deity! But note that, “In the early years the title Baal seems to have been used for the Lord (Yahweh)” (NIDB).[d] Is this an error on David’s part? We do not believe so.

There is no substantial evidence that makes “God” and “Lord” pagan titles. Otherwise, titles such as the Hebrew Elohim, and possibly even the name YHWH itself, would be pagan. Let us be a faith community that can begin to actually read the Bible in its world, and be guided by more facts.

For a further discussion on this and related issues, consult the editor’s article “Sacred Name Concerns.”

NOTES

posted 26 June, 2008

$20.00 including U.S. shipping & handling

$26.00 includes U.S. shipping & handling