Tag Archives: D Thomas Lancaster

Four Questions, Part 1

March 17, 2013 James Pyles 4 Comments

A song of Asaph; God, God the Lord, spoke and called to the earth, from the rising of the sun until its setting. From Zion, the finery of beauty, God appeared. Our God shall come and not be silent; fire shall devour before Him, and around Him it storms furiously. He shall call to the heavens above and to the earth to avenge His people. Gather to Me My devoted ones, who made a covenant with Me over a sacrifice. And the heavens will tell His righteousness, for He is a God Who judges forever.

Hearken, My people, and I will speak, Israel, and I will admonish you; God, even your God am I. I will not reprove you concerning your sacrifices, neither are your burnt offerings before Me constantly. I will not take from your household a bull, from your pens any goats. For all the beasts of the forest are Mine, the behemoth of the thousand mountains. I know all the fowl of the mountains, and the creeping things of the field are with Me. If I were hungry I would not tell you, for the world and its fullness are Mine. Will I eat the flesh of bulls or do I drink the blood of he-goats? Slaughter for God a confession and pay the Most High your vows. And call to Me on a day of distress; I will rescue you and you will honor Me…One who slaughters a confession sacrifice honors Me, and [I will] prepare the way; I will show him the salvation of God.

–Psalm 50:1-15,23 (JPS Tanakh)

This is a continuation on the topic I started discussing in Lancaster’s Galatians: Introduction, Audience, and What Happened to the Torah? and continued in Broad Strokes. These blogs were created as a reflection of my conversation with Pastor Randy in his church office on the evening of Wednesday, March 13th as we discussed the Introduction and Sermon One of D. Thomas Lancaster’s book The Holy Epistle to the Galatians: Sermons on a Messianic Jewish Approach (First Fruits of Zion, 2011).

I mentioned in Broad Strokes that it was impossible to include the entire content of Pastor Randy’s and my conversation in a single blog post, and now I find that it has been impossible to include it in only two. However, this third “meditation” (and what has developed into a series) is also an extension of topics Pastor and I have talked about during previous Wednesday night visits, and I find that the questions and comments continue to circulate through my thoughts as I read the Bible, ponder the Acts of the Apostles, and consider the past, present, and future of Jews and Judaism in the plan of the Kingdom of God, including the nature and continuation of Torah, and the future Temple and the sacrifices.

Four questions have come up (no, not those four questions, although Passover is rapidly approaching) that encapsulate what I’ve been thinking about and hopefully and prayerfully, I think I’ve come up with four satisfactory answers. Question one:

Did All Jews Reject Paul’s Message of the Gospel and Jesus Christ?

One of the issues that has come up more than once in my conversations with Pastor Randy is how quickly and thoroughly the Jewish people rejected Jesus as the Messiah during Paul’s “missionary journeys.” It is completely true that Paul received a “mixed response” from both the Jews and Gentiles he encountered, but I sometimes get the impression that Pastor believes the Jews almost universally rejected the teachings of the risen Messiah simply because they spoke of the risen Messiah (and Easter is fast approaching, too), and that almost no Jewish people anywhere actually embraced the knowledge of and teachings of Christ and became devoted disciples of the Master.

In an effort to counterbalance this opinion, I’m going to provide a series of quotes from scripture, exclusively from Acts, that indicates how many Jewish people did indeed accept the words of hope and salvation about the Messiah who came and died, who rose, and who will one day return as King. Note that this list is not comprehensive and yes, I acknowledge that I am deliberately not including an equal number of quotes regarding how many Jewish people and synagogues also rejected Paul and faith in Messiah. All quotes, unless otherwise stated, are from the ESV Bible.

All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers.

–Acts 1:14

Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”

Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.” And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.

–Acts 2:36-41

Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was his own, but they had everything in common.

–Acts 4:32

Now many signs and wonders were regularly done among the people by the hands of the apostles. And they were all together in Solomon’s Portico. None of the rest dared join them, but the people held them in high esteem. And more than ever believers were added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women, so that they even carried out the sick into the streets and laid them on cots and mats, that as Peter came by at least his shadow might fall on some of them. The people also gathered from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing the sick and those afflicted with unclean spirits, and they were all healed.

–Acts 5:12-16

And he gave her his hand and raised her up. Then calling the saints and widows, he presented her alive. And it became known throughout all Joppa, and many believed in the Lord. And he stayed in Joppa for many days with one Simon, a tanner.

–Acts 9:41-42

As they went out, the people begged that these things might be told them the next Sabbath. And after the meeting of the synagogue broke up, many Jews and devout converts to Judaism followed Paul and Barnabas, who, as they spoke with them, urged them to continue in the grace of God.

–Acts 13:42-43

Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so. Many of them therefore believed, with not a few Greek women of high standing as well as men.

–Acts 17:11-12

And he entered the synagogue and for three months spoke boldly, reasoning and persuading them about the kingdom of God.

–Acts 19:8

As I mentioned, this is only a partial list. You can also consider Acts 17:1-4, 18:7-8, 19:17, and 21:20. I only read up through Acts 21 in my inventory, so I imagine there are more examples of Jewish people enthusiastically accepting Paul and his message. D.Thomas Lancaster in his commentary on Acts 19:8 from Torah Club Volume 6: Chronicles of the Apostles for Torah Portion Vayikra (pp 619-20) says this:

He (Paul) spent three months in the synagogue, every Sabbath arguing persuasively about the kingdom. When Luke says Paul was “reasoning and persuading,” he refers to the standard rabbinic mode of teaching. The rabbis framed their discourses as arguments. Rabbinic argumentation does not imply acrimony or hostility toward opponents. It employs a legal discussion of proof-texts with back-and-forth dialogue, questions, counter-arguments, and logical deductions driving toward a conclusion. The mere fact that an Ephesian synagogue gave Paul a platform for his teaching for three months implies tht the congregation received his message and respected his opinions.

So did virtually all Jews everywhere who Paul came in contact with dismiss him and the Gospel message of Jesus Christ out of hand; the Jews rejecting their own Messiah so that Paul had no choice but to cut loose his own people from the words of salvation and give them only to the Gentiles? No. Of course not. A more complete reading of Acts reveals that Paul’s message almost always received a “mixed response” from both Jews and Gentiles, with some accepting it and some violently opposing it. I’ll address some of the reasons why Jewish populations may have experienced “the offense of the cross” in my next question, but I think we see that “the Jews” did not universally reject Moshiach and in fact, many came to accept and love the Messiah to the point of great suffering and death.

I foolishly thought I could “shoehorn” two questions into a single blog post but that would have made this missive well over 3,000 words long. To make these questions and answers more digestible, I’m creating this as yet another series. Thus Part 2 of this meditation will address the second question that came up as a result of my “Pastor Randy conversations,” and I encourage you to return here and read the continuation of this series in tomorrow’s “morning meditation.”

Uncategorized

Lancaster’s Galatians: Introduction, Audience, and What Happened to the Torah?

March 14, 2013 James Pyles 38 Comments

-D. Thomas Lancaster
from the Introduction (pg 1) of his book
The Holy Epistle to the Galatians: Sermons on a Messianic Jewish Approach

I know I’m going to regret this, but if I wait until tomorrow or later in the week to write this, I’m going to forget something about my conversation with Pastor Randy. I have to get up at an insanely early hour tomorrow, but I need to make a record of what we discussed tonight.

As I write this it’s Wednesday night. I left Pastor’s office just about fifteen or twenty minutes ago after discussing the Introduction and first chapter of Lancaster’s Galatians book with him. You’ll recall I mentioned a few days ago our intention to make a study of Lancaster’s Galatians chapter-by-chapter, week-by-week as the subject of our Wednesday night discussions. I wasn’t sure what to expect when I agreed to focus our weekly talks on this book, but I never thought I’d be involved in such a densely packed conversation. Actually, I was afraid that we would run out of material, since Chapter One (really, Sermon One) is very introductory. However, we barely made it out of the Introduction section and into the first chapter before time ran out.

I finally confessed to Pastor Randy tonight that I’m more than a little in awe that we’re having these conversations. Debating theological topics with him, given his intellect, education, and his fluency in languages, makes me feel like a five-year old trying to discuss the Grand Unified Theory with Albert Einstein. OK, maybe it’s not quite that extreme, but I’m definitely out of my depth. To his credit, Pastor Randy said the benefit he receives is that I am well versed in the New Testament from a Messianic Jewish point of view.

I’m sure there are a few people out there who would disagree with that assessment or me, but such is life.

Did Paul convert to Christianity? That question came up rather abruptly.

No, not from my point of view and Pastor Randy agreed but he believes that Paul changed direction 180 degrees from his former life as a Pharisee, not just in turning from persecuting believing Jews to supporting them and evangelizing the Gentiles, but in his entire conceptualization and attitude about Judaism (as opposed to “Jewishness” which is the quality of a person being a Jew without the religious and halalaic implications) and the Torah.

Acts 15 came into the conversation very quickly and I realized that Pastor Randy believes that not only did James and the Council absolve the Gentiles from having to observe Torah, but the Jewish believers as well. As I’ve said before when addressing Acts 15, I don’t believe James made a decision that extended beyond the Gentile disciples of Messiah.

This all goes back to our previous conversations about the purpose of the Torah, which we’ve been having for many weeks. While Pastor Randy doesn’t believe Jews and their “Jewishness” ended with Jesus, ultimately, he believes the Torah pointed to Jesus as a sort of culmination and that it’s not Judaism but the message of the Gospel that saves. He believes that if Jews had continued in the “Messianic faith” (i.e. Christianity) beyond the first century or two after the ascension, the observance of Torah would have largely fallen away. Certainly the vast majority of what we think of as Rabbinic Judaism wouldn’t have gained traction and evolved and expanded to what we see today, particularly in Orthodox Judaism.

I know more than a few Jews reading my blog post probably just winced or gasped a bit. when reading the last few sentences.

On the other hand, looking at the opposite end of history, we both agree that the Jewish Messiah King will return and sit on the Throne of David in Jerusalem. There will be a Third Temple. The festivals will be reinstated. Gentiles as well as Jews will observe the festivals but, according to Pastor Randy, the Messiah will be the focus, not simply observance for its own sake.

But will “Judaism” disappear? Should “Judaism” (as opposed to “Jews” and “Jewishness”) disappear?

I didn’t hear Pastor say that Jews should disappear, quite the opposite, but we did discuss, and discuss, and discuss what is a Jew, what is Jewishness, and what is Judaism. My argument is that, whether you agree with everything that the Rabbis said, did, and wrote over the past twenty centuries, for right or for wrong, it was the necessary element and organizational structure for the preservation of Jews as a people and without that ethnic, traditional, legal, corporate structure, with only a string of DNA identifying the Jewish people as Jewish , they would ceased to exist as an identifiable people group in the world a very long time ago.

Both Pastor Randy and I agree that God will not allow the Jewish people to perish.

But what then are the distinctions between Jewish believers and Gentile believers in Messiah, both in ancient times and now? That was a hotly debated discussion. No, we didn’t get “hot under the collar,” but we did go around and around the point, orbiting it like two comets chasing each other’s dust trails.

If the Torah is to be observed in Messianic Days during the time of the Third Temple and if God meant for the Torah to be obeyed by the Jewish people prior to the first coming of Messiah and even during his lifetime, what was supposed to happen to it between the ascension and the return? Granted, we have no Temple today, but does that mean the entire Torah is in cold storage awaiting a spring thaw? And what about the sages? Are none of their interpretations, rulings, and judgments valid? Even in Yeshua’s day, he agreed with some of the halachah of the Jewish authorities (PDF) and indeed, he agreed they had authority to make such rulings.

At one point in the conversation, Pastor Randy said that he believes both Jews and Gentiles in Messiah in today’s world should look and behave in substantially similar ways, if not identically based on his understanding of the New Testament. His issue is that Torah was always impossible to keep and was put in place primarily to point to that impossibility and why we all need the Messiah. My point is that such an act looks like God just set the Jews up to try to obey an impossible set of rules for the sake of eventually pointing to Jesus. Those hundreds of generations of Jews who lived and died struggling to obey Torah would have led lost lives if the only reason for Torah’s existence was to make a point. What saved those ancient, devout Israelites?

“Grace,” says Pastor Randy.

My point exactly. Torah never, ever was intended to save. It was always faith and grace.

I think he can agree with the value of the Jewish traditions if they’re viewed as traditions and not behaviors one must do in order to please God. “But what about feeding the hungry and visiting the prisoner,” says I? The Torah didn’t stop, particularly the parts that clearly are a responsibility for Christians and Jews today. And if “Rabbinic Judaism” was God’s mechanism for preserving the Jewish people as a people since the fall of Jerusalem in 70 C.E., then who is to say that it’s wrong? After all, what systems have been put into place to implement and sustain Christianity over the long course of history?

One of the big stumbling blocks in the discussion was “Rabbinic Judaism” which could be defined as relying on a “system” instead of what the Bible says. I countered that a Christian denomination is a system and that Pastor Randy operates within one. He countered that he can and has existed outside a denomination before and that what the Bible says is ultimately more important than a denomination or any other system of religious practice.

But do we have unfiltered access to the Bible and to God? Don’t we use “systems” as the means by which we implement what the Bible tells us to do in our daily lives? Yes, if we take all of the incredible detail involved in living life as an Orthodox Jew, for example, those “implementations” are vast, multi-layered, and frankly, there are many that seem to go too far (I know I’m going to catch heck for that), but it’s still fits my definition of what humans do to “operationalize” a life of faith. Christian denominations do this to a lesser or greater degree, but without the same level of formalization (after all, what is Christmas, what is Easter, and what is Lent?).

Can we live a life of just the Bible without a system (be careful how you answer that)? Are there portions of both the modern Christian and the modern Jewish “systems” that are valid interpretations of a Biblical life, even if Messiah would (and will) have “issues” with other portions?

Jesus made distinctions between halachah he supported and did not support (is it lawful to heal on the Shabbat?) when he was first here and I suspect that he’ll “straighten out” both Jews and Gentiles when he returns. Some Jewish authorities write that one of the things Messiah will do when he comes (returns) is teach Torah properly and I believe it, too.

Pastor Randy says he believes that Gentiles should and will observe Pesach, Shavuot, and Sukkot along with the Jews but you can’t do that without the Torah not only being intact, but valid, and able to be applied in our world.

You can see why we almost didn’t make it out of page 1, let alone the Introduction of the book, and this is where we spent most of our discussion time. Sermon One runs from page 9 to page 19. It’s where we’ll have to pick up next week, but we did encounter an interesting question in the Sermon One material, and one I thought I knew the answer to. To whom did Paul write the Galatians letter? Yes, the churches in Galatia, but who in those churches? On page 19, Lancaster says it’s to the “God-fearing Gentile believers in Galatia” specifically.

But get this:

For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel.

–Galatians 1:11 (ESV)

Would Paul have called Gentles “brothers?” Wouldn’t it have made more sense for him to call his fellow Jews by that name?

We ourselves are Jews by birth…

–Galatians 2:15 (ESV)

Paul is obviously talking to Jewish people at this point.

To give a human example, brothers…

–Galatians 3:15 (ESV)

Brothers, I entreat you…

–Galatians 4:12 (ESV)

I could go on. There’s 4:28, 4:31, 5:11, 5:13, and 6:1 to consider, but according to these references, there’s every reason to believe that Paul was addressing both a Jewish and a Gentile audience in this letter. That being the case, Pastor Randy suggests that Paul is explaining to both Jewish and Gentile believers that obedience to the Law is not necessary if one is in Christ. Is obedience to the Law unnecessary for either the Jew or the Gentile if Messiah is your Master?

Salvation is through Jesus but does that obliterate the Sinai covenant for the Jews? Pastor Randy and I agree that it is through Abraham and the New Covenant that we Gentiles are “grafted in.” We know that the Hebrew for the word “New” in “New Covenant” really means “new” and not “renewed,” even though the wording of the New Covenant (see Jeremiah 31 and Ezekiel 36) largely confirms and expands all of the covenants that God previously made with Israel.

Something I didn’t remember to bring up during my conversation with Pastor Randy is the question of whether or not the New Covenant is already completely written on our hearts or if God is in the process of doing the writing? If the latter, then God may be rather slowly (from a human perspective) doing away with the old (yes, the Torah will go away when heaven and earth go away) and replacing it with the new, but that such a thing has not been accomplished yet (Hebrews 8:13). As I alluded to a moment ago, Jesus also said that “until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished,” (Matthew 5:18) and I don’t think that “all is accomplished” yet. After all, the Messiah hasn’t returned, we don’t have universal peace on earth, the Temple hasn’t been rebuilt, and Israel is not yet the head of the nations.

You can see why I didn’t want to wait until later to get this all down. I’m tired but energized at the same time. I’m fighting well out of my weight class, so to speak, but I have to keep going. I agreed to have these conversations in order to learn and I know that Pastor Randy is both teaching and learning as well.

There’s nothing better to show you what you truly know and believe than to have your belief’s challenged and be asked to give a “ready defense.”

The funny thing is, after the conversation was over and Pastor Randy was walking me to the door of the church (by the time we’re done talking, just about everyone is gone and he wants to make sure all the doors are securely locked for the night), he continued to share with me his love for the Jewish people and his fascination with Judaism. Listening to him talk about his life in Israel and his relationship with his Jewish friends, it is abundantly apparent that he adores the texture, fabric, and essence of living among Jews. But at that moment, his words and emotions seemed so inconsistent with his beliefs on the Law and Judaism relative to our conversation. And yet in every other way, he confirms my own belief in the exceptional “specialness” of what it is to be Jewish and to live a fully realized Jewish life. The Jewish Jerusalem is where we feel the beat of God’s heart.

If ten thousand religious Jewish people came to faith in Yeshua as Messiah tomorrow, should we really ask them to give up everything in their lives that defines them as Jewish and that allows them to worship God as Jews? It sure didn’t sound like Pastor Randy was saying that in those last seconds we had together before I walked out into the night. I know he agrees that we Christians haven’t gotten it all right and we’ve built up our “systems” that help us understand how to obey God. Someday, Messiah will show us what we did right and what we didn’t do right, what we should have included, and what we should have let go.

In examining the vast body of Jewish practice, particularly the complexities of Orthodox Judaism, can we say that much of it is right and necessary now but that when Messiah returns, he will also say what is proper and what is not? Will there be a distinction in Torah for Jews that will be Jewish and will be a Judaism but will not look quite the same as Judaism looks right now?

Incredibly tough questions. I don’t have the answers. Messiah does but he’s not here yet.

This series of conversations and my blogs about them are controversial by design and I don’t expect all of my readers to accept everything I’m documenting here. I have no idea what kind or how much “blowback” I’m going to receive, but I expect there will be some.

Please be patient and exercise kindness and even some restraint in your responses, should you choose to respond. This is a journey of exploration into what for me is an undiscovered country. If you know the territory and would like to share some details about the road ahead, you are welcome to participate.

The journey continues next week.

Addendum, March 15: After reading all of the comments and continuing to struggle with the conversation and the issues involved, I have produced another reflection of my thoughts in an “extra meditation,” Broad Strokes.

Uncategorized

Following the Galatian Letter

March 10, 2013 James Pyles 2 Comments

Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead—and all the brothers who are with me,

To the churches of Galatia:

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins to deliver us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be the glory forever and ever. Amen.

–Galatians 1:1-5 (ESV)

In the Holy Epistle to the Galatians, the Apostle Paul argues against Gentile believers in Yeshua (Jesus) of Nazareth undergoing conversion to become Jewish. Paul maintained that Gentile believers attained salvation and inherited the blessings promised to Abraham through faith, not conversion.

The Apostle Peter said that the writings of “our beloved brother Paul” contain “some things hard to understand.” If that was true in Peter’s day, how much more so today. Paul was a prodigy educated in the most elite schools in Pharisaism. He wrote and thought from that Jewish background. Unfortunately, that makes several key passages of his work almost incomprehensible to readers unfamiliar with rabbinic literature. I invite Christians to use this book as an opportunity to study Paul’s epistle to the Galatians from a Jewish perspective.

-D. Thomas Lancaster
from the Introduction (pg 1) of his book
The Holy Epistle to the Galatians: Sermons on a Messianic Jewish Approach

I reviewed Lancaster’s book the better part of two years ago, but I never thought my write-up did the book justice. Normally, Lancaster writes in an easy to follow manner, making complex theology accessible to laypeople and non-scholars such as me, but Galatians was probably a bit of a stretch to try to get to fit into a comfortable mold. I’m sure I missed a lot along the way, although when I pulled the book out of my closet (my wife allows me exactly one closet for all of my books…she’s trying to train me not to be a “pack rat”), I saw that I have voluminous notes scribbled all over a mass of bits and scraps of paper like so much ticker tape parade confetti. I was obviously trying to “get it.”

And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.

–2 Peter 3:15-16 (ESV)

That’s Peter’s description of and probably experience with the writings of Paul, as Lancaster quoted from in his introduction, and we can see from the full quote that not only can Paul’s meaning be misunderstood, but it can be deliberately “twisted” with the potential result of “destruction” by people Peter refers to as “ignorant and unstable.”

I don’t think you have to be “unstable” to misunderstand Paul and especially his letter to the churches in Galatia, but a lot of us are ignorant (I don’t mean that in a pejorative manner) of what it was to think, write, and live as a highly educated Pharisaic Jew in the middle of the first century, a mere decade or two before the destruction of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem. It may be ignorance, at least in part, that makes Paul’s Galatians letter so difficult to grasp. I’m sure it’s my ignorance that resulted in me not fully comprehending Lancaster’s book back in the summer of 2011.

But that’s about to change.

This coming Wednesday evening, my weekly conversations with Pastor Randy at my church are taking a left turn at Albuquerque, so to speak, and following Paul’s classic letter into Galatia. This time, Pastor Randy and I will be pursuing Paul’s letter together. Frankly, I can’t wait.

I wish Pastor would put his bio on the church’s website (which needs serious help, but I’m working on it) so I could access more than just my failing middle-aged memory to describe him. He’s not only been a missionary and a Pastor, but he also has a history as an educator in a scholarly setting. I’ve seen what he studies and reviews just to get ready for a single sermon, and it usually involves anywhere between twelve and twenty books. In our discussions we may not always agree on everything, but my respect for his knowledge and insight continues to grow geometically with each encounter. Admittedly, it’s an honor to just sit in the same room with him for ninety minutes or so once a week and be able to access his thoughts and experiences, especially since his education and background are a great deal of what I lack.

Lancaster repurposed twenty-six sermons on Galatians, which he delivered to his congregation, Beth Immanuel Sabbath Fellowship in Hudson, Wisconsin in 2008, to create this book I’m about to revisit. That’s twenty-six weeks and twenty-six opportunities for me to not just re-read Lancaster’s book, but to study it and to learn from two fine scholars and devoted believers in Christ.

Along the way, I’m hoping not only to learn a lot more about Paul’s letter, but more about the nature of how Paul saw non-Jewish God-fearing believers within a Jewish worship and faith context, who they were in the Jewish Messiah King, and how he saw their role, and our role, in the Kingdom of Heaven. I’m hoping to learn a little something more about myself as a Christian, too.

I was able to talk with Pastor Randy briefly just before services began this morning (as you can imagine, Sunday is his especially “busy” day) and confirmed our meeting for this coming Wednesday and the plan to cover Sermon 1: Letter to the God-Fearers (Galatians 1:1-5). I’m planning on taking notes as I read through the book and during my discussions with Pastor Randy so that I can collect the results of this experience, not just for my own edification, but hopefully for yours.

I invite you to come along with Pastor Randy and me on this weekly adventure as we return to the churches of Galatia by way of Lancaster’s The Holy Epistle to the Galatians. May we all learn the wisdom and message of our Master together through the voice of his Apostle to the Gentiles, Paul, and through this, may we all draw ever closer to God.

Uncategorized

Return to Jerusalem, Part 6

February 11, 2013 James Pyles 79 Comments

This is the sixth and final part of the Return to Jerusalem series where I’ve been examining the Torah Club, Vol. 6 commentary on Acts 15. I trust you’ve been following along since Part 1, but if not, please go back and read the previous submissions including Part 5 before continuing here.

Last time I asked, so what are the four prohibitions for Gentiles in the apostolic decree and what are their implications for the Christians in ancient times and today? To try to render a complete and detailed answer would invite simply copying and pasting everything in Lancaster’s lesson into this blog which, as I’ve said before, I’m not prepared to do. However, and this is particularly interesting to me, Lancaster borrows the status of the “resident alien” (“Ger” in Hebrew) from various portions of the Torah and applies it to the “resident alien” Gentile disciples worshiping the Messiah and the God of Israel in the midst of the Jewish community.

If indeed it is the case that in Christ these Gentiles have a portion in [Israel’s covenant membership and national eschatology], i.e. that they are saved as Gentiles, then it suffices to apply to them the same ethical principles that would in any case apply to righteous Gentiles living with the people of Israel, i.e. resident aliens.

-Markus Bockmuehl
“Jewish Law in Gentile Churches:
Halakhah and the Beginning of Christian Public Ethics”
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2000), 165

But in citing Bockmuehl, Lancaster reintroduces a problem that flies in the face of his and FFOZ‘s official theological stance on Gentiles and the Torah. While the gerim in the days of Moses were not Israelites as such and did not obtain full membership status in the nation due to lack of tribal affiliation, they did observe a large number (majority? nearly-full obligation?) of the Torah mitzvot in the days of Moses and beyond. The argument of some branches of the Hebrew Roots movement is that the gerim status can be wholly transferred to the Gentile disciples of Jesus and be used to justify Gentile Christian obligation to the full yoke of Torah. Lancaster has spent considerable effort in his commentary to illustrate how James and the Council exempted the Gentiles from the full yoke of Torah because they were not born Jews or converts. Now, he apparently brings in an element in explaining the four prohibitions that could reverse his argument.

It doesn’t help that he explains the four prohibitions, which go well beyond the confines of the Noahide laws, as derived from Leviticus 17-18.

In those chapters, the Torah describes the sins of the Canaanites, warns the people of Israel against imitating their ways, and prescribes four prohibitions which both the Israelite and the stranger who dwells among the nation much keep. “These correspond to the four prohibitions of the apostolic decree, in the order in which they occur in the apostolic letter.” [Richard Bauckham, “James and the Jerusalem Church,” in “The Book of Acts In Its Palestinian Setting, (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995), 459]

-D. Thomas Lancaster
Torah Club, Volume 6: Chronicles of the Apostles
from First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ)
Torah Portion Mishpatim (“Judgments”) (pg 461)
Commentary on Acts 15:20-31

How was this all supposed to be lived out by the Gentile disciples of that day and what are the implications for modern Christians? As I’ve said in previous parts of this series, you’ll have to access the Torah Club (Vol. 6) studies relevant to Acts 15 for the full details, but it seems as if the four prohibitions were a significant subset of the Torah that was to be applied to Gentile believers above and beyond the Noahide laws of their day. That said, there is another source besides Lancaster who also discusses the same material and provides further illumination.

Toby Janicki wrote an article called The Gentile Believer’s Obligation to the Torah of Moses for issue 109 of Messiah Journal (Winter 2012), pp 45-62, and it provides a great amount of detail on the application of the four prohibitions.

I reviewed Toby’s article over a year ago and at the time, I recall being quite surprised when he suggested that our (i.e. Christians) obligation to the Torah of Moses went much further than I imagined, based on his analysis of the aforementioned prohibitions of the apostolic decree.

Toby’s article is still available in full in either print or PDF versions of Messiah Journal, 109 and I consider it required reading when attempting to delve into an understanding of the message of the Council to the Gentiles among the disciples of Messiah, both in the days of the Council and now.

As I’ve said, this message and how it was arrived at, remains very controversial in Christian/Hebrew Roots circles, but before attempting any sort of conclusion to today’s “meditation” and to this series, I want to remind you of how the Gentiles of that day received the “Jerusalem Letter” (Acts 15:22-29).

So when they were sent off, they went down to Antioch, and having gathered the congregation together, they delivered the letter. And when they had read it, they rejoiced because of its encouragement. And Judas and Silas, who were themselves prophets, encouraged and strengthened the brothers with many words.

–Acts 15:30-32 (ESV)

In other words, it was really good news from the point of view of the Gentile God-fearing disciples. After what some of the Gentile believers may have experienced as “mixed messages” from different factions within “the Way” and/or between “the Way” and other sects of Judaism, it must have been a relief to have a final, definitive decision rendered by the Apostolic authority. Further, assuming we can accept Lancaster’s interpretation, it must also have been a relief to the Gentiles that they were not automatically required to convert to Judaism (some may have done so but many or most obviously did not) and thus come under the full weight of Jewish Torah observance and halachah. James had established a halachah for the Gentiles that “raised the bar” as far as behavioral expectations and observances of the Gentile believers, and was well above what was expected of the God-fearers who were not disciples of Messiah or members of universal humanity, but that bar was still not as high as the one God had set for the Jews that, according to Peter’s testimony, “neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear.”

One of the functions of the four prohibitions acted to allow Jewish/Gentile fellowship and interaction within the Messianic community of believers “by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances.” (Ephesians 2:15) Jewish believer Gene Shlomovich puts it this way:

“Where in the written Torah does it prohibit Jews from eating with Gentiles?”

Nowhere! However, many of the Torah laws, including kashrut, were designed, in part, to make Israelites “kadosh”, “separated” or “set aside” from the nations. Since nations all around them ate “treif” or idol-sacrificed food, no devout Israelite would sit down with idol worshippers at the same table, if only because of the appearance of sin. Not only that, eating with idolaters implied fellowship with them, and perhaps taking on their customs and even religions.

However, with the coming of Messiah, G-d reached out to the Gentiles without requiring them to take on the full Yoke of Torah and live in the manner of Jews. Jews, for their part, had to overcome their Torah and culture ingrained aversion to sharing (no doubt still kosher) food with former idolaters-turned followers of the Jewish Messiah. It is said that the leader of the Jerusalem community and brother of Jesus, Yaakov (James) never drank wine or ate meat, but only ate vegetables. This may be because he wanted to fellowship with Gentile disciples of Jesus around their tables without violating the laws of kashrut, to which Gentiles were not obligated nor were expected to be versed in.

I can’t say that Gene has “solved” the conundrum of Ephesians 2 and how the Messiah created “one new man” out of two (without obliterating the Torah and Jewish identity), but it is a nice summary that seems to lead in an interesting direction. We are “one in Christ,” just as men and women, and just as slaves and freemen are “one in Christ,” though obviously still possessing many differences.

If Jesus did reconcile the Jewish and Gentile believers “to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility,” (Ephesians 2:16) then the apostolic decree of James delivered to the body of faithful disciples of Messiah from among the Gentiles by letter and by emissaries, may have been the means to bring down “the dividing wall.”

The net result of my study of Acts 15 using the Torah Club, Vol 6 materials seems to be that we Gentile Christians owe a great debt to our Jewish “forefathers” and share a great heritage with our believing Jewish brothers and sisters. The most exciting part though, is that we are walking side-by-side together toward a future where we are united by a resurrected and returned Messiah King who will finish what we have been commanded to start: rebuilding the fallen tent of David, and restoring the glory of God on earth among both the Jews and the nations.

How do we resolve the matter of the ancient Ger as applied to the late Second Temple Gentile God-fearing disciple? Lancaster doesn’t make that clear, but based on my own reading, particularly of Cohen, the full role of a Ger as it existed in the days of Moses was to allow a non-Israelite to live among the people of God as permanent resident aliens without being able to formally become national citizens due to lack of tribal affiliation. After the Babylonian exile, a tribal basis for Israelite society was lost and affiliation by clan was emphasized. By the time of Jesus, this clan affiliation basis was too lost, and thus the rationale for the status of Ger as it was originally applied no longer was valid. A Gentile in the days of Jesus or later, who wanted to join the community of Israel, in most cases, would convert to Judaism, since becoming a Ger was not an option.

I can only conclude that James (and this is speculation), in establishing halachah for Gentile entry into the Way as Gentiles and equals to the Jewish disciples, was taking some aspect of the Ger status as the best method available to forge an identity of “alien” Gentile disciples living and worshiping among the Jews in their religious sect. I realize your opinion (and for all I know, Lancaster’s) may vary.

The Jewish role in serving God as we see it in the Bible seems all too clear, but we in the church must always remember that our blessings only come by fulfilling our own unique role as “Gentiles called by His Name.” We are not Jews and we are not expected to “act Jewish,” at least to the degree that we appear to be what we’re not. In fact, we rob ourselves of the path God has laid before us by adopting an identity that is not our own. Acts 15 was the starting point on that path and the beginning of that journey for the early Gentile disciples. It is also where we begin today to understand who we are as Christians and what we must do if we are to be considered faithful disciples of our Master and worthy sons and daughters of God.

I know this series has been challenging for some, largely because going against established doctrine (regardless of the doctrine to which you’re adhered) suggests change and nobody likes change. Maybe none of this will result in anyone thinking any differently, but I hope I at least got some people to think about what they believe and consider that there may yet be something new we can discover about ourselves in the Bible.

“If you want to make enemies, try to change something.”

-Woodrow Wilson, 28th U.S. president

So concludes the series Return to Jerusalem. I hope you enjoyed it. Please feel free to (politely) tell me what you think.

Blessings.

Uncategorized

Return to Jerusalem, Part 5

February 10, 2013 James Pyles Leave a comment

The majority of Jewish believers in 49 CE did not accept Paul’s gospel of Gentile inclusion. They challenged the Pauline message by telling the God-fearing Gentile believers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved” (Acts 15:1). They contended, “It is necessary to circumcise [the Gentile believers] and to direct them to observe the Torah of Moses” (Acts 15:5).

The Jewish believers calling for circumcision and conversion did not object to God-fearing Gentiles who wanted to learn about Judaism and Yeshua of Nazareth. God-fearers could be found in any Jewish community – not just among believers. Paul’s opponents objected to elevating the status of God-fearing disciples of Yeshua to that of co-heirs with Isarel and fraternity with the Jewish people. Rabbi [Yechiel Tzvi] Lichtenstein [Commentary on the New Testament: The Acts of the Apostles (Unpublished, Marshfield, MO: Vine of David, 2010), on Acts 15:7; originally published in Hebrew: Beiur LeSiphrei Brit HaChadashah (Leipzig: Professor G. Hahlman, 1897)] explains, “Paul and Barnabas said that the brothers among the Gentiles did not need to be circumcised and keep the [whole] Torah of Moses, but they were still full brothers in Israel and shared in their inheritance.”

-D. Thomas Lancaster
Torah Club, Volume 6: Chronicles of the Apostles
from First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ)
Torah Portion Mishpatim (“Judgments”) (pg 457)
Commentary on Acts 15:20-31

Continued from Part 4 of this series. Make sure you’ve read the previous parts before proceeding here.

It’s hard to believe that any Christian, regardless of denomination or variant sect, could possibly object to such a bright promise as the one Lancaster interprets from the text of Acts 15, but as we’ve seen from some of the comments folks have made in previous parts of this series, such a promise is hotly contested. Traditional Christians tend to balk at the suggestion that the Jewish disciples of Christ never intended to “cancel” the Torah for Jews, and certain branches of the Hebrew Roots movement are dead set against the idea that all Christians everywhere aren’t fully obligated to the Torah mitzvot. It seems that full co-heir status with Israel in the Kingdom of Heaven and in all of the Messianic promises just isn’t enough.

But if Lancaster is correct and James and the Apostles never intended full Torah obligation on the Gentiles (unless some of them chose to convert to Judaism), then what does this mean?

Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood. For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.”

–Acts 15:19-21 (ESV)

The four prohibitions (v 20) aren’t always easy to pick out in inline text, so here they are in list form:

abstain from the things polluted by idols
from sexual immorality
from what has been strangled
from blood

But of all the prohibitions James could have applied to the Gentile God-fearing believers, why these four? What was so special about them? Was he imposing some version of the Seven Noahide Laws on the non-Jewish disciples?

These seven laws, developed centuries after the lifetime of James, Peter, and Paul, are based on what we find here:

And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. The fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth and upon every bird of the heavens, upon everything that creeps on the ground and all the fish of the sea. Into your hand they are delivered. Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. And as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything. But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. And for your lifeblood I will require a reckoning: from every beast I will require it and from man. From his fellow man I will require a reckoning for the life of man. “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image. And you,[plural in Hebrew] be fruitful and multiply, increase greatly on the earth and multiply in it.”

God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant that I have established between me and all flesh that is on the earth.”

–Genesis 9:1-7, 17 (ESV)

While there may be some superficial similarities, it doesn’t seem reasonable to say that James’s four essential prohibitions were directly lifted from the covenant God made with all of humanity through Noah. Also, and this is important, if some version of the Noahide laws were already understood within late Second Temple Judaism, wouldn’t the Jews have already considered all Gentiles bound by these laws? Why would James bother to simply re-state them and how would it have made any sort of distinction between the Gentile disciples of Jesus and the rest of mankind?

Are these four laws of the apostolic decree the only commandments of the Torah enjoined upon the Gentile believers? No. Judaism already taught a minimum standard to which the Torah held all God-fearing Gentiles. The sages taught that certain commandments of the Torah apply universally to all human beings. If not, how could God have punished the Gentiles in the story of Noah? For what did He punish the people of Sodom and Gomorrah? Why did He drive out the Amorites and Canaanites in the days of Joshua? – As Paul says, “Sin is not imputed when there is no Torah” (Romans 5:13).

Based on this line of reasoning, the rabbis derived a list of seven universal commandments. The earliest version of the list appears in the Tosefta (see t.Avodah Zarah 8:4-6).

-Lancaster, pg 459

I know what you’re thinking. I (and Lancaster) am being anachronistic. How can the Noahide laws, which I’ve already said were codified many centuries after James, have been applied to humanity and understood as such by James and the Jerusalem Apostles?

Some critics argue that, since the rabbis formulated the list of seven laws subsequent to the days of the apostles, those laws are not relevant to the context of Acts 15. On the contrary, the apocryphal “Book of Jubilees” (c. 150 BCE) demonstrates that the theological concept behind the laws of Noah already existed well before the days of the apostles:

Noah began to command his grandsons with ordinances and commandments and all the judgments which he knew. And he bore witness to his sons that they might do justice and cover the shame of their flesh the one who created them and honor father and mother, each one love his neighbor and preserve themselves from fornication and pollution and all injustice … [And he said], “No man who eats blood or sheds the blood of man will remain upon the earth … You shall not be like one who eats [meat] with blood, but beware lest they should eat blood before you. Cover the blood … You shall not eat living flesh …” (Jubilees 7:20-32)

That is not to say that the apostles considered observance of the laws of Noah or the four laws of the apostolic decree as sufficient for attaining salvation. The laws of Noah offered Gentiles a baseline for ethical, moral conduct, but salvation came to the God-fearing Gentile believers “through the grace of the Master Yeshua.”

-Lancaster, pp 459-60

I know. Jubilees isn’t canonized Bible, but the plain history of the document tells us that the Jewish people were aware of an application of the laws of Noah over a century and a half before James made his pronouncement that Luke recorded in Acts 15. There was already a Jewish consciousness that God held humanity to a certain set of universally applied standards. And the apostolic decree thus was not a simple restatement of the universal laws of Noah. As we see, Lancaster doesn’t believe that obeying any combination of laws actually “saves” anyone, and the message of James confirms that for Jews and Gentiles, salvation is from the Jews through Jesus Christ.

In today’s “meditation,” I’ve defined the four prohibitions by what they aren’t (the Noahide laws) rather than what they are. So what are the four prohibitions for Gentiles in the apostolic decree and what are their implications for the Christians in ancient times and today? For the answer to that question and more, you’ll have to read the sixth and final part of this series. I had intended to write only five parts rather than six, but when I tried to include all of my material in a single blog post, it was well over 3,000 words long. I’d rather write shorter missives that are easier to read and digest.

See the conclusion of Return to Jerusalem in Part 6.

Blessings.

Uncategorized

Return to Jerusalem, Part 4

February 8, 2013 James Pyles Leave a comment

Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God…For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well.

–Acts 15:19, 28-29 (ESV)

After presenting the proof text, James placed Simon Peter’s decision before the council. He declared, “It is my judgment that we do not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles.” That is to say, “We should not require circumcision and conversion as the criteria for salvation.” James referred to the God-fearing believers as those “turning to God from among the Gentiles.” The word “turning” corresponds to “repentance.” The Gentile believers responded to the gospel message, “Repent, the kingdom is near.”

The decision exempted the Gentiles from circumcision and the particular commandments that pertain specifically to Jewish identity. It prohibited the Jewish believers from forcing those issues on Gentiles. Nevertheless, the apostles did not forbid the Gentiles from voluntarily participating in the Sabbath, the dietary laws, or any aspect of Torah-life.

-D. Thomas Lancaster
Torah Club, Volume 6: Chronicles of the Apostles
from First Fruits of Zion (FFOZ)
Torah Portion Yitro (“Jethro”) (pg 442-3)
Commentary on Acts 15:1-20

This is a continuation of the “Return to Jerusalem” series and I recommend that, unless you’ve done so already, you read part 1 through part 3 before continuing here.

We’ve seen the problem of whether or not Gentile disciples of Jesus should be compelled to convert to Judaism and conform to the full yoke of Torah brought before James and the Jerusalem Council. Each side of the debate has made its case and it appears that the testimony of Peter and his experiences with the Roman Cornelius and his household (see Acts 10) have weighed the debate heavily in one direction. James has presented Amos 9:11-12 as his proof text for allowing Gentiles to receive salvation and access to the Messianic promises without converting to Judaism and in accordance with Peter’s position on the matter.

And now we see what James is going to do about it.

For the Jewish disciples and apostles, the crux of their argument was if or how the Gentiles were to be admitted into discipleship. Should they convert and take on the full yoke of Torah or be allowed to remain Gentiles (not convert) and perhaps follow some other or abridged set of behavioral standards? It was the mechanism for admission that was the point for them, not whether or not Gentiles could/should follow the Torah.

However, I’ve received some comments lately on the earlier parts of this series about whether or not we non-Jewish disciples are obligated to the full list of Torah mitzvot (and arguably, all or much of the subsequent Rabbinic commentary on just how one performs the mitzvot) based on Acts 15 among other New Testament scriptures. Further, the question of whether or not the Jerusalem Council “cancelled the Torah” for Gentile and Jewish disciples of Jesus came up. To me, and especially after reading Lancaster, this is a no-brainer, but I keep forgetting that for most Christians, this raises a tremendous conflict in terms of what they’ve (we’ve) been taught (and as you can tell from my writing, I don’t always think like most Christians).

But I want to continue with my review/analysis of Lancaster’s Acts 15 commentary because I think it has a lot to say to both believing Gentiles and Jews. I won’t say that I believe every word Lancaster writes is undying Gospel (you should pardon the expression), but I do think we should take a serious look at what he says and see if there’s merit in what he’s teaching. I think we can learn much.

For instance, while Lancaster has said that Gentile believers are not obligated to the full yoke of Torah, and especially those mitzvot that have to do with Jewish identity (since they aren’t going to be converting to Judaism), he also says that “the apostles did not forbid the Gentiles from voluntarily participating in the Sabbath, the dietary laws, or any aspect of Torah-life.” But then how are we to separate Gentiles being limited to voluntarily participating in only certain elements of “a Torah-life” and “any aspect of Torah-life?”

I’ll address the specifics of what Lancaster defines as “Torah-life” for the Gentile later parts of this series. That said, Lancaster does give us a bit of a picture of what the “early Christians” were up to relative to the Torah, and maybe even a beginning of the answer to the question I just asked.

The God-fearing Gentile believers of the apostolic era were more Torah observant than most Messianic believers (Blogger’s note: or traditional Christians) today. They worshipped in synagogues in the midst of the Jewish community. They had no other days of worship or holidays other than those of the synagogue. They did not drive vehicles to get to their place of fellowship. To share table-fellowship with Jewish believers in the community, they maintained the biblical dietary laws. For all practical purposes, they looked Jewish already.

To support this claim, Lancaster quotes from Le Cornu’s and Shulam’s “A commentary on the Jewish Roots of Galatians” (Jerusalem, Israel: Akademon, 2005), 835:

This principle has obvious bearing on the language of “troubling” and “burdening” the Gentile believers. James’ ruling for the “majority” of the Gentiles who are now turning to God through Jesus: The Jewish community in Jerusalem will not impose anything on them which they will not be able to bear as a whole. This does not preclude their taking upon themselves additional observances according to their respective abilities and desires.

This lends a great deal of support to Lancaster’s and FFOZ’s position on Gentile Christians and the Torah. While obligation to all of the mitzvot is not imposed on the Gentile disciples as a whole, individuals among the Gentiles may choose to follow the path of Torah more fully and to varying degrees.

I’m going to skip over the “Four Essential Prohibitions” until next time and focus on how the Torah in general is applied to Jewish and Gentile believers. We see that, according to Lancaster and the Jews present at this debate, it was abundantly clear that Gentiles, if they do not convert to Judaism, are not obligated to the full yoke of Torah as a group. But what about the Jews? Did James really abolish Jewish observance of Torah in one fell stroke?

The apostles agreed that Gentile believers did not need to undergo circumcision and full obligation to the Torah as Jews. The obvious corollary requires that Jewish believers are obligated to observe the Torah. The thought that a Jewish believer might also be exempt from the whole yoke of Torah did not enter the minds of the apostles.

Traditional Christian interpretation, however, often assumes that Acts 15 releases both Jews and Gentiles from keeping the Torah’s ceremonial laws of circumcision, Sabbath, calendar, dietary laws, etc. On the contrary, the entire argument of the chapter presupposes that those obligations remain incumbent on the Jewish believer.

-Lancaster, pg 443

Lancaster then finishes off this point by citing some (to Christians, anyway) rather unusual authorities: both a believing Jewish commentator from the 19th century and two unbelieving Rabbis from the 15th and 18th centuries who also wrote scholarly opinions (amazingly enough) on Acts 15. For the full content of their writings as presented in the Torah Club, I encourage you to purchase Vol. 6, but I will briefly quote one source.

And it is forbidden for us to say: “If we have the righteousness of the Messiah unto eternal life, why do we need to observe the Torah, if this is not required for eternal life, for we are only saved by faith?” We are forbidden to speak this way, for who are we to annul it? The Messiah was not made the servant of sin. This is similar to what the Christians said: “Why do I need any longer to give alms to the poor or to do any other good deed, according to the New Testament? Is not my faith enough for me?” It is forbidden to speak like this, for he is a sinner who closes his fist, and the Messiah was not made the servant of sin. Therefore faith does not benefit him, as it says in the epistle of James 2:13, 1 John 3:3, and Paul himself in Romans 6:15. And James says (4:17): “One who knows to do good and does not do it, it is a sin for him,” for the omission is a sin. For when he repents and regrets the wickedness of his heart, then the faith by its power saves him, as Paul also says in Acts 26:20: “Return to God and perform deeds in keeping with repentance.” Then the faith is beneficial.

-Yechiel Tzvi Lichtenstein
“Commentary on the New Testament: The Acts of the Apostles”
(Unpublished, Marshfield, Mo: Vine of David, 2010),
on Acts 15; originally published in Hebrew: Beiur LeSiphrei Brit HaChadashah
(Leipzig: Professor G. Dahlman, 1897).

I am positive that this is the single most difficult message from Acts 15 for the vast majority of Christians to absorb. We have been taught that when it says Jesus is the goal of the Torah, it means the finale as opposed to the “gold standard” of obedience to God that the (Jewish) believers were to unservingly strive for. It is extremely acceptable to most Christians that we in the church are not subject to the “slavery” of the Law, but to believe that any Jewish person who is also a believer continues to be obligated to the Torah teachings is almost too much for us to bear.

I admit that given the scope of Lancaster’s commentary and the limitations of my already lengthy summary of his work, that I cannot indisputably prove that Gentiles have no obligation to Torah while Jews still do (although I think the point regarding Gentiles and Torah is reasonably well made). But in my meager attempts at study and to try to put myself in the place of the people witnessing the council debate this hotly contested (both then and now) issue, I think that Lancaster has made a good case for his conclusions. Again, space and time limitations prevent me from offering a more complete analysis and I don’t want to simply transcribe two weeks of Torah Club lessons into my blog (I’m already guilty of replicating a large portion of the two Acts 15 teachings from TC Vol. 6). Again, if you want to read the entire content of the work supporting these conclusions, you’ll have to consult the Torah Club Volume 6 lessons.

The remainder of this series will address the “Four Essential Prohibitions” and what they mean for Gentile believers, both in ancient and modern days. That’s where we’ll start in Part 5 of “Return to Jerusalem.”

"When you awake in the morning, learn something to inspire you and mediate upon it, then plunge forward full of light with which to illuminate the darkness." -Rabbi Tzvi Freeman