SHOULD CHRISTIANS, FOLLOW THE TORAH ?

[Qnts2]

Qnts2,

All I am saying is that in the light of the New Testament, Torah observance has been ruled out.  Even the dietary laws have been ruled out. Everything pertaining to the Temple, the Levitical priesthood, the festivals, etc. has been ruled out.  So for anyone to claim that they are Torah observant is also to claim that "For us the New Testament does not exist". Paul made it very clear that his righteousness as a very strict Pharisee was NULL AND VOID (Phil 3:1-14).  If Paul counted his Torah observance as "dung" how can any Jew today go back and ignore Paul? He even told Peter that (a) he was dead to the Law and (b) he would not frustrate the grace of God by the works of the Law (Gal 2:19-21).

The New Covenant is not the Mosaic covenant, and I agree they are quite different. 

You are misquoting Paul. He said that his linage was as dung (being Jewish), compared to the riches in Jesus. Both Jew and Gentile inherit the riches in Jesus so linage means nothing. The same with the Mosaic covenant and law. It did not earn the Holy Spirit or eternal salvation

The whole point is that one can not earn salvation by keeping the law. Jesus did it for those who believe on Him. A person can not earn any more righteousness by keeping the law because belief in Jesus gives a person the righteousness of Jesus and nothing can be added to that. A person can not even please God by keeping the law, because God is already pleased with us thru Jesus and nothing is more pleasing to God then Jesus. There is no gain by keeping the law as we have it all through Jesus. So, a person should not keep the law for gain if they are under the New Covenant. But, that does not mean a person is sinning if they do aspects of the law. Doing aspects of the law is not the same as doing the works of the law. 

[Ezra]

While the temple was still standing

, even Paul performed sacrifices.[/quote]

There's your answer. After the Temple was destroyed, there could no longer be any Torah observance, because the book of Hebrews makes it crystal clear that the Old Covenant was null and void. Furthermore the apostles were attending the Temple only during the initial stages of the Church, so this was a passing phase. As the teaching on the Church was established, they all recognized (a) that the Church itself was now the Temple of God, (b) there was no distinction between Jew and Gentile within the Body of Christ, (c) God had blinded national Israel and He was making no distinctions outside the Church regarding Jew and Gentile, and (d) the epistles written specifically to Hebrew Christians from Peter, James, and Paul, made absolutely no reference to Torah observance. "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and the widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world' (James 1:27).

The Old Covenant is all of a piece.  Either observe every minute detail, or turn to Christ who said "It is finished" even before the Temple was destroyed.  That torn veil was God's answer to Torah observance. Christ certainly did not anticipate or encourage the notion that there would be one set of Gentile Christians and another set of Messianic Jews, and each group would be separate from the other.  That is actually a heretical notion which has no foundation in the New Testament whatsoever.

You are misquoting Paul. He said that his linage was as dung (being Jewish), compared to the riches in Jesus.

No. I am not misquoting Paul.  Please note (Phil 3:3-11):

3  For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:

5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;

6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.

8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;

11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.

Please note all the things which Paul counts as "dung".  One of those things was his blameless Torah observance ("the righteousness which is in the Law").  Paul is also making it crystal clear that in Christ there cannot be any righteousness "which is of the Law" (v 9).  Why?  Because God gives to every believer the absolute Righteousness of Christ as a robe (2 Cor 5:21).

[Qnts2]

 

While the temple was still standing

, even Paul performed sacrifices.

There's your answer. After the Temple was destroyed, there could no longer be any Torah observance, because the book of Hebrews makes it crystal clear that the Old Covenant was null and void. Furthermore the apostles were attending the Temple only during the initial stages of the Church, so this was a passing phase. As the teaching on the Church was established, they all recognized (a) that the Church itself was now the Temple of God, (b) there was no distinction between Jew and Gentile within the Body of Christ, (c) God had blinded national Israel and He was making no distinctions outside the Church regarding Jew and Gentile, and (d) the epistles written specifically to Hebrew Christians from Peter, James, and Paul, made absolutely no reference to Torah observance. "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and the widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world' (James 1:27).

The Old Covenant is all of a piece.  Either observe every minute detail, or turn to Christ who said "It is finished" even before the Temple was destroyed.  That torn veil was God's answer to Torah observance. Christ certainly did not anticipate or encourage the notion that there would be one set of Gentile Christians and another set of Messianic Jews, and each group would be separate from the other.  That is actually a heretical notion which has no foundation in the New Testament whatsoever.

 

You are misquoting Paul. He said that his linage was as dung (being Jewish), compared to the riches in Jesus.

No. I am not misquoting Paul.  Please note (Phil 3:3-11):

3  For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:

5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;

6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.

8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;

11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.

Please note all the things which Paul counts as "dung".  One of those things was his blameless Torah observance ("the righteousness which is in the Law").  Paul is also making it crystal clear that in Christ there cannot be any righteousness "which is of the Law" (v 9).  Why?  Because God gives to every believer the absolute Righteousness of Christ as a robe (2 Cor 5:21).

Again, you are misinterpreting Paul. You emphasize what you want to emphasize and ignore the rest. Paul is talking about his linage, being Jewish. He is talking about his credentials as a Jew. He counts it as loss. Why? Because linage, being Jewish, does not mean a person is saved. Gentiles are saved as well as Jews so being Jewish means nothing when it comes to eternal salvation.

So double back, Paul claims to be of the circumcision which means Paul is saying he is Jewish. Paul says he has reason to trust the flesh more, but Pauls flesh is Jewish. Circumcised on the 8th day is about being Jewish. Of the tribe of Bejamin means Paul is Jewish. A Hebrew of Hebrews and a Pharisee means Paul is well educated as a Jew and a leader among the Jews. Persecuting the church which was entirely Jewish when Paul persecuted them and therefore Paul was persecuting Jews whom he felt were violating the Torah. As far as the Mosaic law, Paul was devout as a devout Jew would be. All of Paul's claims has to do with being Jewish.

Under the law, performing according to the law, in the OT, is credited to the person as righteousness. Since the OT is from God, God is saying performance of the commands is credited to the person doing the law, as righteousness. It is their own righteousness because it comes about by their own works. Once again, the Mosaic covenant does not offer eternal salvation, so our own righteousness amounts to nothing eternally. 

[Guest shiloh357]

 

While the temple was still standing

, even Paul performed sacrifices.

There's your answer. After the Temple was destroyed, there could no longer be any Torah observance, because the book of Hebrews makes it crystal clear that the Old Covenant was null and void. Furthermore the apostles were attending the Temple only during the initial stages of the Church, so this was a passing phase. As the teaching on the Church was established, they all recognized (a) that the Church itself was now the Temple of God, (b) there was no distinction between Jew and Gentile within the Body of Christ, (c) God had blinded national Israel and He was making no distinctions outside the Church regarding Jew and Gentile, and (d) the epistles written specifically to Hebrew Christians from Peter, James, and Paul, made absolutely no reference to Torah observance. "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and the widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world' (James 1:27).

The Old Covenant is all of a piece.  Either observe every minute detail, or turn to Christ who said "It is finished" even before the Temple was destroyed.  That torn veil was God's answer to Torah observance. Christ certainly did not anticipate or encourage the notion that there would be one set of Gentile Christians and another set of Messianic Jews, and each group would be separate from the other.  That is actually a heretical notion which has no foundation in the New Testament whatsoever.

 

You are misquoting Paul. He said that his linage was as dung (being Jewish), compared to the riches in Jesus.

No. I am not misquoting Paul.  Please note (Phil 3:3-11):

3  For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:

5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;

6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.

8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;

11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.

Please note all the things which Paul counts as "dung".  One of those things was his blameless Torah observance ("the righteousness which is in the Law").  Paul is also making it crystal clear that in Christ there cannot be any righteousness "which is of the Law" (v 9).  Why?  Because God gives to every believer the absolute Righteousness of Christ as a robe (2 Cor 5:21).

The book of Hebrews was written while the Temple was still standing, and so Paul should not have been making a single sacrifice if your approach is correct. Secondly, Paul never said that observing the Torah was counted to him as dung.  Nothing in the list of things Paul mentions including the observance of the Torah.   The Torah is part of the word of God.  Paul counted his accomplishments and his ethnic and religious pedigrees as dung.   He never said counted the Torah, or keeping the Torah as dung.

To repudiate the Torah would create all kinds of theological problems for a NT Christian since there is not one doctrine (save the mystery of the church) that isn't contained in the Torah.  The Torah is the seedbed for all New Testament doctrine. 

[Esther4:14]

Yes, we obey the Torah as New Testament believers because we obey Christ and He is the fulfillment of the law (Matthew 10:4).  We accept a sacrifice for sin the same way the Torah required, but there is one sacrifice, not many (Hebrews 10:12).  Much of the law pertaining to things that would defile you, was an exercise of humility, which we still observe in submitting to one another in reverence to Christ (Ephesians 5:21).  

The greatest commandment to love your God and your neighbor as yourself is the actual practice of the Sabbath (Mark 12:30-31).  "but the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God. (and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’Mark 12:30). On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your ox, your donkey or any of your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns, so that your male and female servants may rest, as you do (You shall love your neighbor as yourself," (Mark 12:31).  Therefore, yes we should still be keeping the Sabbath, just like we still keep the other commands not murder, steal, or bear false witness.  So, yes, we do still keep the law.  Too often discussions of the law get sidetracked into something that sounds more like bad testament and good testaments debates, but this is because we are not understanding how the law was fulfilled in Him completely.  

If the law were not important to us as believers, than the Old Testament would not be included.  But, the law is important because to know the law is to know Him and who He is in a deeper way.  He has come so that we might understand the law.  He is the law.  Therefore, it is hard to understand how we have such difficulty understanding the law today when He came that we might have understanding through the presence of His Spirit living in us.  

To understand the law is to understand the importance of obedience to Him.  It is to understand the reward for obedience, because contrary to the opinion that the Old Testament is the bad testament, Israel was blessed with complete protection and prosperity because of their obedience to the law.  Not a bad deal in exchange for pork and shrimp.  

The problem was never the law, but disobedience; and, as Saul lost his position as king for disobedience, Israel lost their privilege under the law for the same, and David replaced Saul as King of Israel (1 Samuel 15) as Christ replaces the law of Moses, which is not the same thing as Israel losing their privilege fulfilled through Christ.  However, obedience is still the central requirement.  Therefore, we obey what is written in the New Testament concerning food for the reason that Israel would have obeyed the law concerning what to eat, to demonstrate obedience to Christ who died for our sins because, "obedience is better than sacrifices" (1 Samuel 15:22).   Trying to follow the restrictions regarding food expecting the same promises for obedience that were given under the Old Covenant with Israel when He has clearly said to do otherwise in a vision He gave to Peter (Acts 10:9-16), is the same thing as the people trying to defeat the Amelekites and Canaanites when there was no blessing to do so (Numbers 13-14).

To know the law is to know Christ, which is why the Torah is part of the Bible.  "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever." (Hebrews 13:8).   

[Ezra]

 

While the temple was still standing

, even Paul performed sacrifices.

There's your answer. After the Temple was destroyed, there could no longer be any Torah observance, because the book of Hebrews makes it crystal clear that the Old Covenant was null and void. Furthermore the apostles were attending the Temple only during the initial stages of the Church, so this was a passing phase. As the teaching on the Church was established, they all recognized (a) that the Church itself was now the Temple of God, (b) there was no distinction between Jew and Gentile within the Body of Christ, (c) God had blinded national Israel and He was making no distinctions outside the Church regarding Jew and Gentile, and (d) the epistles written specifically to Hebrew Christians from Peter, James, and Paul, made absolutely no reference to Torah observance. "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and the widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world' (James 1:27).

The Old Covenant is all of a piece.  Either observe every minute detail, or turn to Christ who said "It is finished" even before the Temple was destroyed.  That torn veil was God's answer to Torah observance. Christ certainly did not anticipate or encourage the notion that there would be one set of Gentile Christians and another set of Messianic Jews, and each group would be separate from the other.  That is actually a heretical notion which has no foundation in the New Testament whatsoever.

 

You are misquoting Paul. He said that his linage was as dung (being Jewish), compared to the riches in Jesus.

No. I am not misquoting Paul.  Please note (Phil 3:3-11):

3  For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:

5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;

6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.

8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;

11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.

Please note all the things which Paul counts as "dung".  One of those things was his blameless Torah observance ("the righteousness which is in the Law").  Paul is also making it crystal clear that in Christ there cannot be any righteousness "which is of the Law" (v 9).  Why?  Because God gives to every believer the absolute Righteousness of Christ as a robe (2 Cor 5:21).

Again, you are misinterpreting Paul. You emphasize what you want to emphasize and ignore the rest. Paul is talking about his linage, being Jewish. He is talking about his credentials as a Jew. He counts it as loss.

When we see what Scripture says plainly, we all need to accept what is right in front us.  You keep harping on lineage so let's break it out so everyone reading will understand that lineage in ONLY ONE of the things which Paul has crucified and buried and regards as dung:

1. CIRCUMCISION - Circumcised the eighth day

2. BEING A TRUE BORN HEBREW (LINEAGE) - of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews;

3. BEING A STRICT PHARISEE -- as touching the law, a Pharisee;

4. BLAMELESS TORAH OBSERVANCE -- touching the righteousness which is in the law [Torah], blameless... not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law [Torah],

5. UNCONVERTED ZEAL FOR GOD -- Concerning zeal, persecuting the church

So, out of five separate items, his lineage is just one. And Torah observance is now counted as dung for the Christian Paul.  Case closed.

[peacemakerIND]

 

While the temple was still standing

, even Paul performed sacrifices.

There's your answer. After the Temple was destroyed, there could no longer be any Torah observance, because the book of Hebrews makes it crystal clear that the Old Covenant was null and void. Furthermore the apostles were attending the Temple only during the initial stages of the Church, so this was a passing phase. As the teaching on the Church was established, they all recognized (a) that the Church itself was now the Temple of God, (b) there was no distinction between Jew and Gentile within the Body of Christ, (c) God had blinded national Israel and He was making no distinctions outside the Church regarding Jew and Gentile, and (d) the epistles written specifically to Hebrew Christians from Peter, James, and Paul, made absolutely no reference to Torah observance. "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and the widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world' (James 1:27).

The Old Covenant is all of a piece.  Either observe every minute detail, or turn to Christ who said "It is finished" even before the Temple was destroyed.  That torn veil was God's answer to Torah observance. Christ certainly did not anticipate or encourage the notion that there would be one set of Gentile Christians and another set of Messianic Jews, and each group would be separate from the other.  That is actually a heretical notion which has no foundation in the New Testament whatsoever.

 

You are misquoting Paul. He said that his linage was as dung (being Jewish), compared to the riches in Jesus.

No. I am not misquoting Paul.  Please note (Phil 3:3-11):

3  For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:

5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;

6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.

8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:

10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;

11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.

Please note all the things which Paul counts as "dung".  One of those things was his blameless Torah observance ("the righteousness which is in the Law").  Paul is also making it crystal clear that in Christ there cannot be any righteousness "which is of the Law" (v 9).  Why?  Because God gives to every believer the absolute Righteousness of Christ as a robe (2 Cor 5:21).

Again, you are misinterpreting Paul. You emphasize what you want to emphasize and ignore the rest. Paul is talking about his linage, being Jewish. He is talking about his credentials as a Jew. He counts it as loss.

When we see what Scripture says plainly, we all need to accept what is right in front us.  You keep harping on lineage so let's break it out so everyone reading will understand that lineage in ONLY ONE of the things which Paul has crucified and buried and regards as dung:

1. CIRCUMCISION - Circumcised the eighth day

2. BEING A TRUE BORN HEBREW (LINEAGE) - of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews;

3. BEING A STRICT PHARISEE -- as touching the law, a Pharisee;

4. BLAMELESS TORAH OBSERVANCE -- touching the righteousness which is in the law [Torah], blameless... not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law [Torah],

5. UNCONVERTED ZEAL FOR GOD -- Concerning zeal, persecuting the church

So, out of five separate items, his lineage is just one. And Torah observance is now counted as dung for the Christian Paul.  Case closed.

Brother 

In same time Paul is explaining 

He has some privileges as other people having..

He is just explaining.. in some other writing he denied all of privileges as waste things..

He is very nice dedicated person and went to die even he knows that.. 

[Ezra]

The book of Hebrews was written while the Temple was still standing, and so Paul should not have been making a single sacrifice if your approach is correct.

Paul took a Jewish vow and offered Jewish sacrifices (Acts 21:18-26) in 60 AD AT THE BEHEST OF OTHERS (James and the Jerusalem elders).  The book of Hebrews was written between 64 and 68 AD.  The Temple was destroyed in 70 AD. Had Paul not been urged (for the sake of Christian unity) to go through these rituals, he would not have done so.

Secondly, Paul never said that observing the Torah was counted to him as dung... Nothing in the list of things Paul mentions including the observance of the Torah... He never said counted the Torah, or keeping the Torah as dung.

 

Already addressed and answered in depth.  Paul did indeed count his Torah observance as “dung” in comparison to the excellency of knowing Christ personally. Please read and digest the Scripture quoted. 

To repudiate the Torah would create all kinds of theological problems for a NT Christian since there is not one doctrine (save the mystery of the church) that isn't contained in the Torah.  The Torah is the seedbed for all New Testament doctrine.

This is not about “repudiating the Torah”. There is a huge difference between trying to be a “Torah observant” Jew today, and accepting wholeheartedly that the Torah is indeed the very Word of God.  The point which you and others seem to be missing is that IN THE LIGHT OF CHRIST AND HIS FINISHED WORK the Old Testament is NULL AND VOID. If you don’t believe this, study the epistle to the Hebrews.  What Messianics are trying to do is straddle the fence, but the book of Hebrews says, “No more straddling the fence.  You can either have Moses or Christ, but not both at the same time”.  Why? Because when Christ said “IT IS FINISHED”, Torah observance was finished. Proof?  The veil separating the Holy Place from the Holy of Holies was torn from top to bottom by God Himself.