PDA

View Full Version : Should Believing Jews Observe OT Customs?


Surrender
June 6th, 2007, 06:55 PM
Believing Jews were never commanded to stop the observances of the Feasts or OT commandments like circumcision. Acts 21 shows Paul going to see James and the elders in Jerusalem. James warns Paul that the converted Jews heard rumors that Paul was telling the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses and not to circumcise their children or walk according to the customs.

Paul chose to show them that they should, indeed, walk according to the customs keeping the Law, by partaking in a custom while there (Acts 21:26). This way all would know that there was nothing to the rumors. In other words, they SHOULD walk according to the customs keeping the Law AND circumcise their children.

However, James reminded Paul that he and Peter had written to the believing Gentiles that they were not obligated to these customs but that they should abstain from meat sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication (from Acts 15).

In Acts 15 Paul and Barnabas went up to Jerusalem. At that time, Peter reminded the believers that God had chosen to give the Holy Spirit to the Gentiles too. He also reminded them that both Jew and Gentile are all saved through grace in the same way. But by chap. 21, we see that the customs continued to be observed. Not that this saved but that they were observed anyway.

When Paul speaks about the Jew who is one inwardly and that circumcision is that which is of the heart by the Spirit, not by the letter (Rom. 2:29), he is not condemning circumcision. He is condemning those who put following the letter the Law above following the Spirit of the Law. This doesn’t mean one should avoid the letter of the Law. It is not the letter of the Law which is sinful; it is the follower. Believing Jews were placing themselves above believing Gentiles because they had the letter of the Law, but Paul reminded them that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin (Rom. 3:9).

When Paul writes about how the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants through faith, he writes that the promise is guaranteed to those who ARE (presently) of the Law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham (Rom 4:16). BUT even those who are of the Law are heirs only through faith (Rom. 4:13-14). It is not having the letter of the Law nor following the letter of the Law which makes one an heir; it is following the Spirit of the Law through faith in accordance with grace which makes one an heir. Does this faith nullify the Law? Paul says “no”, it establishes the Law (Rom 3:31).

When Paul writes to the Corinthians (believing Gentiles), he teaches on remaining in the state in which Jesus has called the believer. If an uncircumcised man is called by God, there is no reason to become circumcised since circumcision is not what saves (1 Cor. 7:19). This is not a commandment to believing Jewish families to stop circumcising their children on the eighth day. If the circumcised child grows to be a man and is called by God, he should not become uncircumcised (1 Cor. 7:18).

Again, in writing to Galatia, Paul refutes Jews who taught that Gentile believers must obey the Jewish Law in order to be saved. We already know from Acts 21 that Paul, James and other believing Jews continued to walk according to OT customs AND circumcise their children. We know from Romans 2 and 4 that Paul places following the Spirit of the Law above following the letter of the Law while reminding us that this does not nullify the law but establishes it.

Paul confirms in 1 Cor. 7 what he wrote in Galatians (circumcision means nothing in terms of salvation). He tells the already uncircumcised man that if he receives circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to him (Gal. 5:2). Paul says to remain in the state in which you were called (1 Cor. 7:19). The believing Jews were still not quite getting freedom in Christ, and they continued to place this burden of circumcision on the converting Gentiles (see also Acts 15:10). Again, it was this idea of following the letter of the Law rather than the Spirit of the Law, which takes one from under grace and places one under the Law (Gal. 5:4). That is why Paul said that any uncircumcised man who becomes circumcised out of obligation is at risk of falling from grace and placing himself under ALL the obligations of the Law (Gal. 5:3-4). It is NOT the decision to become circumcised which causes one to stumble; it is the motives behind the decision. It is NOT following the Law which is in question; it is HOW one follows the Law which is in question. Is it followed through letter or through faith? Is it followed by the power of man or by the power of God?

After reminding them of the freedom they have in Christ, Paul also reminds them that he STILL preaches circumcision (Gal. 5:11), and we know this is true because of Acts 21:21-26. Paul’s persecution was not the result of what he said about circumcision, it was the result of what he said about freedom in Christ. Those with a hard heart full of pride were opposed to this freedom. They could work out their own freedom through their flesh, or so they thought.

Paul never admonished circumcision; he admonished the motives behind it. Our confidence should be in Christ alone and not in the flesh (Phil. 3:3). For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love (Gal. 5:6).

So, telling believing Jews that they must abandon the OT customs to prove they have faith in Jesus is the same thing as telling them they must keep the OT customs to prove they have faith in Jesus. Believing Jews were never commanded to stop walking according to OT customs, keeping the Law.

HeIsEnough
June 7th, 2007, 09:48 AM
Just some points to consider.


Acts 9

15But the Lord said to Ananias, "Go! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel. 16I will show him how much he must suffer for my name."

As a firm frame of reference, Paul's message he received, did indeed include the Jews.


After reminding them of the freedom they have in Christ, Paul also reminds them that he STILL preaches circumcision (Gal. 5:11), and we know this is true because of Acts 21:21-26.

This is not true friend. It is in fact, just the opposite. Paul preached grace apart from law. A new priest of a different order.


Galatians 5

Freedom in Christ
1It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.

2Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 4You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. 5But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. 6For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

7You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth? 8That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you. 9"A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough." 10I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion will pay the penalty, whoever he may be. 11Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. 12As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!

13You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature[a]; rather, serve one another in love. 14The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself."[b] 15If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.

If Paul was still preaching circumcision, he would not have been beaten and stoned as often as he was.

All that said, a Jew can indeed obey the customs.....I don't know why they would not really. The difference is in what constitutes salvation and what does not.

BlessedinHim
June 7th, 2007, 11:30 AM
I think it boils down to how they think their salvation is granted. I dont see a problem in the Jewish people to continue most of their customs. But the Lord Paid the Price when He died on the cross.

Once a Jew is saved through faith in Jesus, they should not go back to sacrificing. The sacrifice is done.

If after a person is saved and they go back to the law, then there is now no more sacrifice.

When you read the whole book of Galatians, it explains this very well.

You were under the law, but now grace through the cross has fulfilled the law. Why would you want to go back to the law? The law doesnt save, it teaches and points out our sins that have to be covered by the blood. What is better? The blood of goats and sheep, or the Blood of our Lord and Saviour?

Jesus was the final sacrifice, sufficient for all.

Going through their traditions and customs is not bad for remembering where they once were, but there is now no need to continue sacrifice once you have accepted the Blood of the Lord as the ultimate sacrifice for all times.

Surrender
June 7th, 2007, 12:37 PM
Hi HIE! Thanks for your input.

Just some points to consider.

As a firm frame of reference, Paul's message he received, did indeed include the Jews.:nod

This is not true friend. It is in fact, just the opposite. Paul preached grace apart from law. A new priest of a different order.My interpretation of the Gal. 5:11 verse was hasty. It is true Paul questioned the motives of an uncircumcised man desiring to become circumcised and warned against this as it was an attempt to gain grace through works. However, Paul DID teach that Jews should continue to circumcise their children and walk according the customs of the OT (Acts 21).

All that said, a Jew can indeed obey the customs.....I don't know why they would not really. The difference is in what constitutes salvation and what does not.:nod

HeIsEnough
June 7th, 2007, 01:11 PM
Shalom friend.

However, Paul DID teach that Jews should continue to circumcise their children and walk according the customs of the OT (Acts 21).


I would say that Acts 21 is not an implicit teaching by Paul to obey the customs. He did indeed perform the rites, but that is not the same as a teaching. There is a difference between command and adherence, else those 'zealous for the law' would have won out a long time ago and all Jewish believers in Messiah would still be bound to obeying all the law. It's a package deal.

I deliberately included the Hebrew writers inspiration in regards to Christ being from a different priesthood. This is to show that the Jew has options in what he is required to do, in that the new covenant is not the old covenant.

Hootmon
June 7th, 2007, 02:13 PM
I deliberately included the Hebrew writers inspiration in regards to Christ being from a different priesthood. This is to show that the Jew has options in what he is required to do, in that the new covenant is not the old covenant....an important distinction...

Surrender
June 7th, 2007, 02:13 PM
Shalom friend.

I would say that Acts 21 is not an implicit teaching by Paul to obey the customs. He did indeed perform the rites, but that is not the same as a teaching. There is a difference between command and adherence, else those 'zealous for the law' would have won out a long time ago and all Jewish believers in Messiah would still be bound to obeying all the law. It's a package deal.

I deliberately included the Hebrew writers inspiration in regards to Christ being from a different priesthood. This is to show that the Jew has options in what he is required to do, in that the new covenant is not the old covenant.Ahhhh. Got it. Thanks. :thumb