A friend told me this evening about YashaNet's decision in Sivan 5767 (May 2007) to remove the directory of Messianic Congregations from their website. Here is the reason they give for that change:

We are no longer providing the messianic congregations listing. The decision was not an easy one for us. We've taken this step because the overwhelming number of groups calling themselves "messianic" are mired in a christian approach and interpretation of Torah that is inconsistent with its teachings as found in Judaism since Moses' time and before.

Wow! That's amazing and extremely refreshing. It is not often that a Messianic website takes such a straightforward approach to Messianic Judaism, with clear conviction that we are a branch of Judaism, not a Christian denomination. Great job, guys, and keep up the good work!

Labels: Messianic Judaism

Yeshiva World News is reporting that a federal court ruled against a Messianic Jew in Cleveland who filed a civil rights suit against the U.S. Postal Service.

A Jewish postal worker made to work on Sabbath because of staff cutbacks lost an appeal claiming his work schedule violated his civil rights.

Mail carrier Martin Tepper joined the post office in Chagrin Falls, about 20 miles southeast of Cleveland, in 1980 and became a Messianic Jew a few years later.

For ten years he was excused from working Saturdays, but the letter carriers’ union voted to rescind that accommodation amid pressure from fellow postal workers upset at having to work more weekend shifts because of staff reductions.

Tepper sued the U.S. Postal Service in federal court in Cleveland. He lost and a subsequent appeal to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was denied, with the appeals court ruling Tepper could not prove he was discriminated against or that the post office failed to accommodate his beliefs.

“The removal of the accommodation did not result in a change of title, job status, pay or job responsibilities and conditions,” a three-judge panel ruled. “While Tepper now has to work on Saturdays, this is simply a requirement of the job for which he was hired; it is not an adverse change in employment.”

The appeals court also rejected Tepper’s claim to a civil rights violation, saying he hadn’t proven he was treated differently in his workplace because of his beliefs.

Tepper could ask the appeals court to reconsider or appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court.

More info at Cleveland.com.

This case has serious implications for all of us who observe Shabbat. The definition of "reasonable accommodation" seems to be less narrow than I thought. A "reasonable accommodation," according to this suit, now includes the option of taking unpaid days off.

If I were Tepper, I would sue the labor union for not allowing him to defend his civil rights in their forum. That is probably not possible, though. At the very least, I hope he takes the case to the Supreme Court and wins it there. The possible effects of this are pretty broad.

On another note, the comments on the article on Yeshiva World News are very interesting. It is frustrating that people still associate real Messianic Judaism with J4J. The level of misinformation about us in the rest of the Jewish community is pretty big. For instance, the idea that Messianic Judaism is an offshoot of Mormonism... The answer? Keep following Torah as active and sincere members of the community, and work hard to show that we are not just a bunch of missionaries in sheep’s clothing.

Labels: Judaism, Messianic Judaism, Shabbat

I was asked to write a commentary on 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 for this week's Set Table Young Messianic Shabbat Table Guide. Here it is:

In the 15^th chapter of 1 Corinthians, Sha’ul moves from his discussion on an important, if somewhat controversial, topic—the gifts of the Spirit—to a discussion on the resurrection of Yeshua. In some ways it is curious that Sha’ul decides to focus on this element of our belief instead of on the death of Yeshua. After all, at the beginning of this same letter he places the death of Yeshua as his main proclamation (1:23) and as his main focus (2:2). Now we see Sha’ul writing an extended section on the resurrection of Yeshua, not on His death. Why?

The resurrection of Yeshua is the fulcrum upon which our faith balances; it is the actual “good news” that we are so happy about (15:1). Yes, Yeshua died to provide atonement for sins, but the resurrection shows the power of G-d over death. Yeshua’s resurrection is the sign that G-d’s desire to redeem mankind is not limited to the realm of the ordinary, but is definitely within the realm of the extraordinary.

“Yeshua’s death to provide atonement is ordinary!?!?” you say incredulously. In a sense, yes, according to Jewish thought. Chazal (our sages) discussed at some length that the death of a tzaddik could provide atonement. For instance, in b. Moed Katan 28a we read:

‏א"ר אמי למה נסמכה מיתת מרים לפרשת פרה אדומה לומר לך מה פרה אדומה מכפרת אף מיתתן של צדיקים מכפרת א"ר אלעזר למה נסמכה מיתת אהרן לבגדי כהונה מה בגדי כהונה מכפרין אף מיתתן של צדיקים מכפרת‎

R. Ammi said: Wherefore is the account of Miriam’s death placed next to the [laws of the] red heifer? To inform you that even as the red heifer afforded atonement [by the ritual use of its ashes], so does the death of the righteous afford atonement. R. Eleazar said, Wherefore is [the account of] Aaron’s death closely followed by [the account of the disposal of] the priestly vestments? [To inform you] that just as the priest's vestments were to effect atonement, so is the death of the righteous atonement.

The resurrection of Yeshua is more important than his death. Not only did the Tzaddik die to provide atonement, He also rose after three days as the firstfruits of our own future resurrection and the redemption of the world (15:20-24).

Sha’ul makes another point in our reading that is very important. Not only did the Messiah rise from the dead, he appeared to the leaders of the community and even to as many as 500 people before he ascended into heaven. These men staked their futures and their lives on the fact that they saw Yeshua alive, that the resurrection really had happened. In verses 14 and 15, Sha’ul sums up the gravity of this decision:

... and if the Messiah has not been raised, then what we have proclaimed is in vain; also your trust is in vain; furthermore, we are shown up as false witnesses for God in having testified that God raised up the Messiah...

Our faith is not built on a wobbly foundation. It is built on the true and faithful witness of those men. In the same way, we should stand as faithful witnesses of this same Besorah, of the resurrection of our Messiah, for the generations who will come after us.

Labels: Messianic Judaism

David Bogner over at Treppenwitz posted a great story about a past Thanksgiving that I think everyone should read. Being observant of the laws of kashrut is not always the default in Jewish communities, or even in extended families, but this family goes to a huge effort to make sure that there are no hindrances in the way of everyone joining in. While Lindsey and I have been blessed in the past by some family members and close friends making efforts to ensure that we can eat the food that they are serving, the vast majority of our friends and family members do not know or even care about the restrictions in our diet.

I really wish that the Messianic community would learn from this example. Just because you don't follow the laws of kashrut or don't observe them as strictly as someone else, does not mean that you can't accommodate those that do, especially in synagogue-related activities. Defaulting to the highest observance level is not about condoning that observance. It is about making the event accessible to everyone, just as much as putting in a wheelchair ramp or having Spanish translations of the service.

Labels: Judaism, Messianic Judaism, Personal

Of all the idiotic..... PaleoJudaica reports that there is a new movie about "Jesus" that opens this weekend. Color of the Cross (I won't do it the honor of a link to its website) stars a black man as "Jesus". While this is not surprising to me, it is very frustrating. The goals of this film are, in reality, no different than those of many people who would like to turn Yeshua into a blond-haired, blue-eyed white guy. Both sides strip Yeshua of his Jewishness and turn him into a symbol of their own ideals. This reminds me of a book that we published earlier this year at work called "When Black Men Stretch Their Hands to G-d." The author of that work, George McCalep, a black pastor, says "... I am implying that Jesus was of African descent and a man of color." He then goes on to talk about how certain people in Yeshua's lineage were actually black, and ends up with this bit of interesting scriptural interpretation:

When we think of Solomon, we think of the wisest and richest man ever. He did not ask for riches. Solomon asked for wisdom and God gave him both wisdom and riches. This is the Solomon who wrote at least two books in the Bible, and the one who said, “I am ruddy and handsome.” Ruddy means “black.” He was saying that he was black and handsome. Solomon was what we would call a hunk today. He was good-looking, smart and rich, but he had a problem. He had too many wives and concubines. Yet, his name and his mother’s name are in the genealogy of Jesus Christ. Mary had a little lamb and His flesh was not as white as snow. [bold emphasis mine]

Funny..... I thought ruddy means "red". At least according to every dictionary out there it does. Well, then if that is the case, I guess we need to teach that Solomon was a Native American.

Yeshua was not white. He was not black. Yeshua was a Jew. He was probably more Arab-looking than anything else. It is this constant re-writing of Yeshua by parties with their own biases that makes it so hard for us to really understand him. If we would just look at him in is real environment and stop trying to make him into our own image, we might really grasp his message and the impact that he came to make on this world.

As a side note, has anyone else noticed the headcovering that one of the women in the film is wearing? It looks to me like a "Palestinian" kefiyah.

Labels: Messianic Judaism

From the AP (via Ynet)—emphasis mine:

Jackie Mason suing Jews for Jesus

Saying he's "as Jewish as a matzo ball or kosher salami," Jackie Mason filed a lawsuit against Jews for Jesus for using his name and likeness in a pamphlet.

The USD 2-million lawsuit seeks the immediate destruction of the pamphlet, which members of the missionary group have been handing out at various points around New York City.

"While I have the utmost respect for people who practice the Christian faith, the fact is, as everyone knows, I am as Jewish as a matzo ball or kosher salami," the 75-year-old comedian said in documents filed in state Supreme Court in Manhattan.

Founded in the 1970s, Jews for Jesus practices Judaism but regards Jesus as the Messiah.

'Pamphlet good-natured'

The pamphlets feature an image of Mason next to the words "Jackie Mason... A Jew for Jesus!?" with information inside that outlines the similarities between Jews and Christians.

"The pamphlet uses my name, my likeness, my 'shtick' (if you will), and my very act, which is derived from my personality, to attract attention and converts," Mason said in an affidavit.

Susan Perlman, a spokeswoman for Jews for Jesus, said the pamphlet was "good-natured."

"Shame on him for getting so upset about this," she said Friday.

Mason has starred on Broadway and in films including "Caddyshack II."

Shame on him?!?! No, shame on you, JforJ. That attitude is amazingly uncaring and disrespectful. If Jackie Mason disagrees with his image, name, and "shtick" being used in a pamphlet, it is his perogative to ask that the pamphlet be removed from circulation and destroyed. And it is JforJ's responsibility to honor his wishes, not to respond with such an amazingly uncaring response.

This is just one more exhibit in my growing list of reasons why Jews for Jesus is not a real Messianic group, does not speak for us as a community, and actually gives us a very bad name and reputation within the Jewish world. JforJ is Christian. It is a missionary organization that does not practice Judaism and is only concerned with the numbers involved in "getting Jews saved."

Jackie, I hope you win.

Labels: Messianic Judaism

Gil Student posted on his blog on Monday about a missionizing effort underway in New York. Someone created a DVD called "Days of Moshiach" and sent them to Jewish people all over NYC this past weekend, but specifically to Crown Heights, Lakeway, and other orthodox areas. I won't help the video's Google ranking by linking to its website, but I will say that you can find it easily with any search engine.

The website has a home page, separate English and Yiddish introductions, and separate pages to download the video. The tiny bit of introductory material on the site is scripted to give away nothing about the content of the film or its goals. It is written in an Ashkenazi format (using "Toyrah", "mitzvos", "tzores", etc.) that is intended to make it look more normative.

The movie itself is apparently made up of various clips from the movie "Jesus of Nazareth" (which I think is in the public domain) and some pieces from another source, possibly (though not probably) from the creators of the film themselves. "Days of Moshiach" is voiced-over in Yiddish, apparently in an attempt to make it more palatable to Orthodox Jews. Since I am not Ashkenazi and do not know Yiddish, I cannot critique the content of the film, but a few people have said that the Yiddish is fluent and well-spoken. The movie gives away no information at all about its creators. It doesn't even have credits or attributions at the end, only a P.O. Box address.

Since I could not easily find any information about the movie's creators, I decided to search a little deeper. However, they have covered their tracks quite effectively. As I mentioned, there is no information on the website about who owns it. The owners even went to the trouble of registering the domain name through Domains by Proxy to keep the registration info a secret. The return address on the DVD envelopes was:

AMJP
P.O. Box 21685
Brooklyn, NY 11202-1685

However, the address given at the end of the film is:

Hope in Moshiach
P.O. Box 1185
Roswell, GA 30077-1185

Searches on both of these addresses did not lead to any information, and the "Hope in Moshiach" website (also registered through Domains by Proxy) forwards directly to the "Days of Moshiach" website. I was unable to find any information on "AMJP", even when making up names that fit, like "American Mission to the Jewish People", etc. Searches for Messianic groups Roswell, Georgia only brought up a few hits, but the websites did not have links to the movie nor was the HTML code in any way similar to the movie website's code. The in The "Days of Moshiach" website code is very clean and very minimal, using HTML 4.01 and image maps. There is no actual text on the website and the JPEGs don't have any exif information. The website's IP address (68.178.211.123) resolves to GoDaddy, where the site is apparently hosted. All this clearly points out that the movie's creators did not want to be found.

If you have read the other portions of my website (start here) you know my views on the Hebrew Christian elements in our community. These groups invariably cause more problems than they solve. Their militant evangelism makes them an anathema within the Jewish community. Their actions also make it hard for the rest of us to live peaceful lives within the Jewish community because we are associated with these people.

The in-your-face approach to telling people about Moshiach only causes tensions. How many people have been convinced by these tactics? Better yet, how many orthodox Jews have been convinced by them? Is making enemies the best way to "win souls"? I think not. Yeshua said that he is the stumbling block, that he is the offense. We don't have to add our own offenses.

If you really want to impress people with what you think is true, then live it. Worry about your relationship with the Creator and let Him deal with the hearts of others. I am not going to go out on the streets and accost Jews (or anyone else) with my beliefs. Been there, done that. I don't even consider that approach to be truly spreading "good news." I live my life. I follow Torah. I answer questions when and if they are raised, and I live unashamed of what I believe. That is enough. If someone sees Hashem in me and wants to know what I think, I will gladly tell them. Anything else borders on being insulting—even degrading—and only causes tensions within the community.

Labels: Messianic Judaism

Rabbi Dauermann posted an excerpt regarding the Jewish people from an unnamed book on missiology. He asked for comments on the excerpt, and I am posting my comments here for you to read. Please read Rabbi Dauermann's post and the excerpt first:

As I read this excerpt I found myself speaking back to the author in my head, at times quite loudly, so here are a few of the thoughts that came to my mind:

The author puts "faith" in the first paragraph in quotation marks, showing his opinion clearly from the get-go. According to him, there is no faith in Judaism, only "traditions".

"the Jewish faith constitutes enemy territory" -- Herein lies the thesis of the author's approach to Jews and Judaism. However, this thesis is critically flawed. The passage he quotes later in the excerpt shows an important difference between the author's approach and G-d's approach: "As regards the gospel, they are enemies of God for your sake" (Rom. 11:28). The first problem is that the author places Jews and Judaism as his own enemies, not as enemies of G-d (as far as the Besorah is concerned), as Paul is clearly saying. The second problem is that the author ignores the extremely important point that Paul goes on to make in the second part of verse 28 and in verse 29: "but as regards election they are beloved, for the sake of their ancestors; 29 for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." Jews may arouse G-d's wrath (just as Gentiles may do the same, see verse 30), but regarding election they are still beloved by G-d because of the Patriarchs, and He will never revoke their calling as His people. The author's thesis is thus irreparably damaged. He (the author) has no enemies, and G-d has determined that His people will be His people for eternity. Thus, speaking to Jewish people about Messiah is not "an invasion of alien territory". G-d fights a battle in the hearts of all people, and He does not need us to fight this battle for Him. As he said to Shmuel, "the L-rd does not see as mortals see; they look on the outward appearance, but the L-rd looks on the heart." (1 Samuel 16:7)

"Today’s Jews are divided into groupings ranging from the outspoken atheists of Reform Judaism and uncommitted agnostics of Conservative Judaism to Orthodox Jews who are faithful to Jewish rites and rituals." -- Obviously the author has never met the Jews that I know. The vast majority of Jews that I have met from all backgrounds are committed, spiritual people with real faith in G-d. The author is entirely too quick to relegate them to the trash bin and cast aspersions on their faith based on his assumptions about their beliefs and their hearts.

"There are historical reasons for this insistence that Messianic believers must be pushed from the family but the chief reason..." -- with these words, the author effectively dismisses the long history of Christian aggression against Jews. If we lived in a world that did not have that history of persecution, I firmly believe that the extreme dissonance between Messianic believers and their non-messianic families would be dramatically different. When Jews look back and see the forced conversions, the millions raped and murdered in the name of "the Gospel", it is no wonder that they are opposed to Christianity and to Messiah. The Church forgot that Yeshua is the stumbling block, and instead became the stumbling block in Yeshua's place.

"Paul faced enmity because his gospel did not make room for the "traditions" (Gal. 1:14)." -- I don't know what Bible the author is reading, but he has missed the entire point of Galatians 1:14 and has read into Paul a distaste for the traditions of his people that Paul did not possess. Paul says nothing disparaging in Galatians 1:14 about the traditions he followed. He merely states a fact: he was more zealous for the traditions than his peers, so he advanced further than they did in his observance. We must remember that Paul considered himself to be Jewish his entire life. He had the same zeal for G-d when he wrote Galatians that he had had before his experience on the Damascus road. He did not consider himself to be a "Christian" because there was no such thing. He approved of Torah and of its observance, and continued to follow it until his death. What changed for him? Messiah. That's all.

Labels: Messianic Judaism

I have been collecting some great quotes over the last few months with the intent of sharing them when I had some time. As you can probably tell, I have found some time hidden in my amazingly full schedule. This current post relates directly to yesterday's post about the "Golden Age" ideal and Messianic Judaism's approach to rabbinic authority.

There are many people within Messianic Judaism who take issue with the concept of rabbinic authority. I would venture to guess that 99%+ of these people have never cracked the Shulchan Arukh, nor have they ever studied other elements of the Torah shebal peh for themselves. I have yet to meet a Messianic Jew who has done so and still thinks badly of the concept of rabbinic authority.

Those in the 99%+ adhere to the goal of "getting back to the way things were in the 1st century". However, as lamedzayin said, "attempts to recreate the past must do so at the expense of dealing with the present." We cannot afford to ignore the present, and there is no validity in trying to become Saducees. Instead, many people are being influenced by Karaites like Nehemia Gordon, who has taken it upon himself to teach Messianics what to believe (based on bad scholarship, in my mind). While Karaism may look Biblical on the outside it is not true Judaism and needs to be handled with extreme caution.

What it comes down to is something that one of the writers on Maven Yavin stated a few weeks ago:

But ultimately TSHBP is faith based... The proselyte [from a midrash quoted earlier] could have gone to a Sadduccee and been converted and also taught the Aleph-Bet correctly.... However, the point is that he went to Hillel. This is what he wanted in on. If you go to Hillel, if you want to join our club then you must ultimately trust our interpretations and traditions.

That, my friends, is the gist of the matter. This has become one of my biggest soapboxes in recent months. We need to remember that G-d gave His religion to the Jews. He gave them the ordinances and then told them to observe them and to interpret them—to adapt them as necessary for the benefit of the world. He has revealed himself as the G-d of Israel, so we must learn to approach him in that capacity. That means that we must engage the halachah, not attack it. How can we ever hope to be seen as a valid form of Judaism if we are not doing what Judaism, event its liberal anti-Torah elements, does?

Labels: Messianic Judaism

(___) Judaism is essentially an attempt to reconstruct a "Golden Age" of Judaism. The problem is that this Golden Age never really existed in the romanticized form that (___) Jews like to think it did. The world was always a lot more complex. What's worse is that many of the practices and ideas of the past that (___) Judaism wishes to recreate, even the ones that are historically accurate, were only functions of a particular time and place and not essential components of Judaism.

Lamedzayin suggests over at Maven Yavin that the blanks in this simple statement can be filled in with both "charedi" and Conservative". I would say that they can also be easily filled in with "Messianic". While the vast majority of the Messianic community hopes to "get back to the Scriptures", or "get back to the way it was in the first century", Lamedzayin points out correctly that "attempts to recreate the past must do so at the expense of dealing with the present."

I am convinced that the best approach to our journey is to embrace where we are now, not to attempt a return to the Golden Age. What is the main issue I am talking about here? Rabbinic authority. Fighting with the idea of rabbinic authority and trying to push the issue aside is only detrimental to us and to the larger Jewish commmunity. If we claim to be a valid form of Judaism then we must engage the rabbinic writings and the halachah that stems from them. It is not enough to say that basar b'chalav "isn't found in the Torah". We have to find out why that is the normative practice in Judaism (even in Reform Judaism) and engage the sources in the development of our own halachah on the issue. That is how every other Jewish movement has developed, and we should be no different.

The biggest obstacle (besides our pride and our fear) is the fact that we have few scholars who are qualified to actually engage the texts. We need to encourage the new leaders coming up (my generation) to develop the necessary skills and learn the necessary information to be useful in this journey. That will require some other changes, as well—like developing frum environments where our children can grow up observing and engaging the Torah. That will take hard work for the current generation, but the rewards will be seen in the many generations to follow.

That is what I am doing in my home. My goal is to create an environment where my children will engage the Torah and observance not only as part of Messianic Judaism but as part of greater Israel. I fall short of this goal in many ways, partly from just not having enough observant examples to follow. But I am willing to work hard at it for the good of my family.

When thinking about the issue of Rabbinic authority never forget that G-d gave this thing to the Jews, and with it he gave the right and the responsibility to interpret and develop it wisely. I personally think that they have done a great job.

Labels: Messianic Judaism

Gil over at Hihurim has a great post on the issue of gaining Torah insights from a gentile. I have thought about this issue from time to time, since my work involves developing eBooks for a christian company and I invariably end up reading parts of the books I work on. I dislike some of the books we publish, and I disagree with all of them in major and minor points, but occasionally I see a teaching that is both right and beautiful.

How can I justify doing the work that I do despite the fact that my company's books teach theology that runs counter to my own and at times is even anti-Torah? My best response to that question is to say that I have the ability to influence my company's decisions on whether or not to publish books that contain anti-Semitic or blantanly anti-Torah teachings. When we get a preview copy of a book that has anything to do with Judaism or a related topic, my boss brings it straight to me. He trusts my opinion on those works and has declined publication offers on every occasion when I have expressed concerns. If I can contine to be a positive influence on the quality of materials being made available to pastors and teachers in the christian world, straining out the schmutz and encouraging better content, then I feel that my job is worthwhile.

I am also taking an active role in encouraging the publication of original lanuguage works in our program, with the goal of seeing more christians engage the original texts with understanding. I would love to get us access to some good Jewish commentaries and even to develop a library of Jewish works that will encourage even more learning in that direction.

Now, while it may seem like I am encouraging cencorship, I should say that I am not. If I were promoting censorship I would raise issues with every book I edit. My goal is to raise awareness and remove impediments. If a proposed book screams that the Jewish people are not G-d's chosen people, then I see no reason to condone its publication. If a proposed book advocates the speaking of G-d's name or ridicules Judaism for its practices, then I feel that I am obligated to contest its publication. That is, after all, why my boss brings me these books in the first place: to get the opinion of someone outside the camp on how the books will be seen by others in the same position. It is both an honor and a huge responsibility to represent Jewish thought in that discussion.

The only way to point people to truth is to get out there and stick out a finger. And you know me... I have no qualms about pointing my finger where I think the truth can be found.

Labels: Messianic Judaism

In Hebrew class tonight, my teacher mentioned in passing that the Hebrew word ‏תּוֹרָה‎ (Torah) comes from the root word ‏יָרָה‎ (yara). I had never thought of this before, but something occurred to me that you might find interesting. ‏יָרָה‎ (Strong's #H3384) is commonly translated as “shoot” or “throw”. One Hebrew dictionary says that this word has a “strong sense of control by the subject.”

The definition “shoot,” is used in reference to arrows, and is what yara is most translated as. This imagery is very interesting to me because an oft-misinterpreted passage in the Torat Hashlichim makes an allusion to yara’s other meaning, Torah.

For Moshiach is the goal of the Torah for righteousness to everyone who believes.

Romans 10:4

The word I translate as “goal” is the Greek word τέλος (telos). It is most often translated “end” with translators and commentators saying that the Torah has been ended/finished/usurped by Moshiach. However, that does not mesh with what Sha’ul says in the rest of the book of Romans. Even if you look at the first three verses in this chapter, the context becomes clear and “goal” makes more sense.

What is neat here, though, can be seen when you combine the two thoughts. Sha’ul would have been well aware of the root of the word Torah, and I think he is drawing on that understanding. The Torah is an arrow that G-d shot into existence at creation. Its goal (where it points, what it travels toward) is the Moshiach. The Torah is not done away with as a result of this flight. As a matter of fact, it is still flying, hopefully pulling us along on its journey. When will that journey end? Yeshua says that it will continue “until heaven and earth pass away” (Matthew 5:17-21).

May we be blessed to follow the Torah on its path toward Moshiach.

Labels: Messianic Judaism

This is a response to a question a friend of mine asked me about this passage of scripture, a passage that is used very often to question the validity of observing the Torah (the Mosaic Law). My response was written in an attempt to clarify what I see Sha'ul as saying. It is posted here because I think that it is an important topic that deserves some attention. Enjoy and please feel free to comment!

---------------------------------------------

First, we must remember that Paul is discussing the issue of justification and specifically, the problem of the Judaizers teaching that in order to be justified in G‑d’s sight everyone must follow the Torah perfectly. This legalism was beginning to take root in the congregation in Galatia, and Paul was hoping to show how wrong it is.

3:1-9

Paul relates justification to the promise G‑d gave Abraham, saying that Abraham’s faith was what justified him before G‑d, and that the Torah, which came 430 years later, could not change that fact. We can understand from that something very important about the Torah: it is not built on the premise of works righteousness. It did not change the setup that G‑d had instituted with Abraham; G‑d just created a system whereby mankind would be able to see their sinfulness and be led to him. The justification for that sin still came from faith.

3:10-13

Now, about verses 10-12... Young’s Literal Translation says (emphasis mine):

¹⁰ for as many as are of works of law are under a curse, for it hath been written, “Cursed is every one who is not remaining in all things that have been written in the Book of the Law--to do them,” ¹¹ and that in law no one is declared righteous with God, is evident, because “The righteous by faith shall live;” ¹² and the law is not by faith, but--“The man who did them shall live in them.” ¹³ Messiah did redeem us from the curse of the law, having become for us a curse, for it hath been written, “Cursed is every one who is hanging on a tree,” ¹⁴ that to the nations the blessing of Abraham may come in Messiah Yeshua, that the promise of the Spirit we may receive through the faith.

Notice a few things about this passage and the words I emphasized. First, Paul leaves out the definite article “the” when using the word “law” in verses 10 and 11 (I checked this in the Greek, as well). This is not the case in verses 12 and 13 where he uses the article. Why is this? I believe that he is making a distinction between legalism and the Torah. He says, “You cannot be justified through legalism; as a matter of fact, if you are trying to do so you are only putting yourself under a curse.”

Let’s delve a little bit deeper. Paul goes on to say (in verse 12) “and the law is not by faith.” This verse says in Greek: ὁ δὲ νόμος (literally, “this moreover law”) using the nomitive-singular-masculine article ὁ. Verse 13 says: τοῦ νόμου (“the law”) using the genitive-singular-neuter article τοῦ. I am not a Greek scholar, but I think that there is a reason (beyond normal grammar rules) for Paul using different cases of the article “the”, different cases of the word for “law” (νόμος and νόμου), and even placing the article in front of “moreover” (verse 12). I believe that in verse 12 Paul is continuing his thought from 11, saying that legalism (“this law”) does not exist out of faith. Then, in verse 13 he says that Messiah has redeemed us from the curse pronounced in the Torah (which he quoted in verse 10).

3:14

Referring back to the point he made in verse 8, Paul then reminds the reader of his overall topic: “...that to the nations the blessing of Abraham may come in Messiah Yeshua, that the promise of the Spirit we may receive through the faith.” Don’t forget that Paul is pursuing this line of thought to make it clear that the legalism being taught by the Judaizers has no place in the plan of G‑d.

3:15-18

Paul makes two important points here. First, he says, “Even covenants made by men are not subject to being voided or rewritten.” Kal v’chomer, a covenant made by G‑d cannot be voided or revised. Paul is applying this statement to the Abrahamic covenant, but it is just as easily applied to the Mosaic covenant, both of which are related to us in the Torah.

This is strengthened by Paul’s second point: “A covenant confirmed before by God to Messiah, the law, that came four hundred and thirty years after, doth not set aside, to make void the promise.” (That is the literal translation of verse 17, unlike the translation found in many Bibles.) If so, then kal v’chomer the Torah cannot be set aside by the giving of another covenant by Messiah.

Paul then says that legalism (νόμου with no article) cannot bring the inheritance (that is, justification) because that would be in opposition to how G‑d dealt with Abraham.

3:19-23

Now, on to verse 19. Young’s again: “Why, then, the law? on account of the transgressions it was added, till the seed might come to which the promise hath been made...” The question about this verse revolves around the use of the word “until.” Does Paul mean to say that the Torah only had power until Messiah came? Obviously not, given his other teachings. I think that the explanation for this is found in Romans 7:

⁷ What, then, shall we say? the law is sin? let it not be! but the sin I did not know except through law, for also the covetousness I had not known if the law had not said: ⁸ “Thou shalt not covet;” and the sin having received an opportunity, through the command, did work in me all covetousness...

This ties in with what Paul says in Gal 3:22: “but the Writing [i.e. Scripture] did shut up the whole [i.e. everything] under sin, that the promise by faith of Yeshua Messiah may be given to those believing.” What is Paul’s point? That the legality of determining what is and is not a transgression was added to G‑d’s system for the purpose of leading everyone to His promised justification while waiting on that promised justification to be fulfilled in Messiah (which would make it freely available to everyone -- see verse 8 and verse 28).

However, something happened to G‑d’s system--legalism got in the way. Verse 23 says that “before the coming of the faith, under law we were being kept, shut up to the faith about to be revealed.” That phrase “under law” is ὑπὸ νόμον, and it refers to being underneath a legal system, i.e. legalism. It is not saying (as most translations put it) that we were held under THE Law (the Torah), since the definite article is not present in the Greek.

Conclusion

The overarching point of this whole passage (3:1-4:7), and indeed the entire book of Galatians, is that G‑d wanted to make justification freely available to the Gentiles (3:8). He gave the Torah to increase the ability of all people to see the need for this justification. Then, in Messiah, He brought us to that desired goal. He gave us the ability, through the faith Abraham had, to obtain the same justification Abraham had.

This removes from the conversation the issue of the Torah’s validity. That is not the issue on Paul’s mind, and it is not even a discussion in which he engages (as we can see in his other writings). He is only concerned with showing (in a slightly round-about way) what role the Torah played in G‑d’s plan to bring justification to the entire world, but specifically, how the legalism being taught by the Judaizers was not the path G‑d intended for anyone to take to Him.

In 3:25, Paul says that the Torah acted like a “pedagogue” (from the Greek word παιδαγωγόν) to lead us to Messiah. However, now that the faith Abraham had has been made readily available to anyone, we no longer need the Torah to act in that way. That is because through the faith we have access to in Messiah we are free from legalism and finally able to serve G‑d by following His Torah. Just as Jeremiah 31:33 says, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it,” we now have the ability to follow G‑d’s instructions with perfect clarity because he has given mankind a change of heart. We do not need the Torah to act as a pedagogue any more because we have the commands written inside us and we are not going to stray off the path into legalism again. The Rules are still there, the directions on how to live are still in place. The difference is in that one area: the defense against legalism.

Since this is the case, the argument that someone who follows the Torah is being legalistic can be seen in a whole new light. I think that this passage is the best defense against that assertion, because it shows that legalism is not an issue for those who are following Messiah and who have allowed Him to write the Torah on their hearts.

Labels: Messianic Judaism