Hallo aan almal,
Ek begin vandag met 'n nuwe reeks teachings uit die Nuwe Testament. So 'n rukkie gelede het daar 'n email in my 'posbus' beland wat 'n paar vrae aan die Hebrew Roots gemeenskap stel. Een daarvan is of die boek Galasiers net soveel aandag kry as die ander boeke in die Skrif. Ek dink dit is 'n goeie vraag, veral in die lig van al die kritiek teen Paulus wat tans die rondte doen. Hy is seker een van die mees kontroversiële figure in die Skrif en ek dink nie ons verstaan hom altyd reg en in konteks nie. Ek nooi julle om saam met my na daardie 'moeilike tekste' te gaan kyk, daardie wat jou familie en vriende altyd aanhaal om jou te probeer oortuig dat die Torah nie meer vandag geld nie.
Liewe vriende, elkeen van ons het die verantwoordelikheid om self die Skrifte te ondersoek. Ek bid vir wysheid en onderskeidingsvermoë vir myself en elke persoon wat hierdie teachings lees. Mag YHVH ons almal help om te groei in Sy Waarheid sonder om 'n man soos Paulus sumier te veroordeel. Ons moet altyd onthou hy het 'n klomp briewe aan gemeentes geskryf, net soos ons vandag maak. Hy het sy opinies en interpretasies oor die Skrif met mense gedeel, net soos wat skrywers vandag maak. In sekere briewe kom hy BAIE sterk en veroordelend oor, net soos sommige teachers vandag. Dit sal altyd my pleidooi wees om Paulus te lees en te verstaan in dieselfde konteks as enige ander skrywer. Nêrens in sy briewe verhef hy sy eie skrywes tot Skrif nie, dit was mense se besluite om dit te doen. Kom ons waardeer Paulus vir die kykie wat hy vir ons gee in die lewe en wêreld van die gelowiges van daaardie tyd. Kom ons leer deur hulle foute en kom ons waak daarteen om weereens verdeeldheid in die Liggaam te veroorsaak. Geliefdes, nie een van ons het die volle Waarheid in pag nie ............
Shalom
Madeleine
Galatians proves that we should observe the Torah
www.eliyah.com/galatianskjv Galatians, what a misunderstood book!
Often, one of the first things a nominal Christian will say when you tell them the law has not been abolished is: "you need to read the book of Galatians!" In spite of the multitude of scriptures in the "New Testament" which demonstrate we should keep Yahweh's law, many understand Paul's letter to Galatians to state otherwise.
In reality, there is not a single verse in the book of Galatians or anywhere in the scripture that would tell us that the law has been abolished. Rather, much to the contrary! The book of Galatians actually proves that while we are not saved by our observance of the Torah (The Hebrew word translated "Law" all throughout the scriptures), true believers will make a sincere effort to walk in its precepts.
In this study we will go through each of the verses in Galatians chapter 2 through chapter 5, which contain the key verses speaking of Yahweh's Torah/law and its place in our life. It is the words in these chapters that are most frequently understood as "abolishing the law". Thus, we will examine them to see if Paul is really making any claim that the law is now abolished and not to be heeded.
Questions answered on
these study pages are:
Did Paul say that the law is abolished?
Was Paul talking about feast and Sabbath days when he said "you observe days, months, times and years?"
Does the Sinai covenant bring us to bondage?
What does it mean to be "under the law?"
Should believers in Messiah be circumcised?
Did Paul rebuke Peter for trying to get Gentiles to keep the Torah?
Are those who observe the Torah under a curse?
Did the law end when the Messiah came to earth?
Almost all of the Christian world regards Paul's letter to the Galatians as "proof" that we need not concern ourselves with keeping Yahweh's Torah/law. This is a major mistake that must be addressed thoroughly. It is often more difficult for a person to 'unlearn error' than to 'learn truth.' For this reason, the studies into the book of Galatians is longer than most.
Galatians chapter 2
After his introduction, the first thing Paul mentioned in his letter to the Galatians was:
Galatians 1:6-9 - I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Messiah unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Messiah. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
This topic is the subject matter throughout the book of Galatians. The real question in the book of Galatians isn't whether or not we should keep the Torah. The real question is this: What is the "true good news" that Yahushua wants us to proclaim? Does the true "good news" mean that we receive salvation after we have been circumcised and kept the law? Does the true "good news" proclaim salvation through abolishing the law so that our sins are taken away? Or does the true good news simply proclaim that we can receive forgiveness for transgressing that law if we repent and believe in Yahushua...nothing added?
Let's examine:
Galatians 2:1-2 Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also. And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.
This chapter begins with Paul describing his time in Jerusalem with his fellow laborer in the faith, Barnabas. They had gone to Jerusalem to discuss the matter of what the true "gospel/good news" is really supposed to be. What is needful for a person to receive salvation? The 15th chapter in the book of Acts discusses this visit to Jerusalem in detail:
Acts 15:1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, [and said], Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. 2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.
Notice carefully that the reason this trip was necessary was due to certain men from Judea teaching the brethren that they would have no salvation unless they were first circumcised. When they brought this doctrine to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem, Peter/Kepha referred to this kind of theology a "a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear":
Acts 15:5-11 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses." 6 Now the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter. 7 And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: "Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago Elohim chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 "So Elohim, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, 9 "and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10 "Now therefore, why do you test Elohim by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? 11 "But we believe that through the grace of the Master Yahushua Messiah we shall be saved in the same manner as they."
Peter/Kepha states that all are "saved" through the grace of Yahushua Messiah. As evidenced by this statement, the question they were discussing is whether or not the Gentiles were saved through the grace of Yahushua the Messiah, or by circumcision and keeping commandments. This was also the original question in Acts 15:1.
Kepha said, "we believe that through the grace of the Master Yahushua the Messiah we shall be saved, even as they." His point was that everyone, Jew or Gentile, is saved by grace, not by keeping the law or by circumcision. Even Jews who had been circumcised and kept the law didn't have salvation until they believed in Yahushua. He also said that to make circumcision or Torah/law observance the requirement for salvation would be to "test Elohim." But how would it "test Elohim?"
The testing would be: "Can Yahweh still bring the Gentiles into His flock while making the (quite painful) painful act of adult circumcision, and/or keeping the Torah/law of Yahweh a prerequisite to being saved?" In truth, there was not a man in all the generations of Israel who had ever kept the Torah, so to make the keeping of the Torah a requirement before salvation was not the true "good news" that Yahushua and the apostles were to be teaching.
So Peter, after detailing the proof that Yahweh had accepted the Gentiles in their uncircumcised state (Cornelius received the Spirit in Acts 10), affirmed that both Jews and Gentiles are saved through the grace of Yahushua the Messiah rather than circumcision or any other act of Torah/law observance. The ultimate decision in Acts 15 by James was not to require circumcision for salvation .
So who were these "certain men from Judea" anyway? To properly understand the book of Galatians and the context of Paul's letter, it is important that we have an good understanding of what kind of people Paul was facing. For this reason we will begin to identify the beliefs and characteristics of these "certain men from Judaea." In this study, we will keeping a running list of notable characteristics of these "certain men" as we go along. Here is what we have so far:
So who were these "certain men from Judea" anyway? To properly understand the book of Galatians and the context of Paul's letter, it is important that we have an good understanding of what kind of people Paul was facing. For this reason we will begin to identify the beliefs and characteristics of these "certain men from Judaea." In this study, we will keeping a running list of notable characteristics of these "certain men" as we go along. Here is what we have so far:
They were from Judea. (Acts 15:1)
They were "sect of the Pharisees" (Acts 15:5)
They claimed to be believers in Yahushua. (Acts 15:5)
They believed that one cannot have salvation unless they are first circumcised and/or keep the Torah. (Acts 15:1)
They were vigorous in their belief to the point that they would argue with Paul and Barnabas over it, and even approach the apostles and elders about it. (Acts 15:1,5)
Continuing in Galatians 2:
Galatians 2:2-3 And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain. 3 But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised:
Chronologically, the event Paul is describing (Acts 15) marks the first notice of Titus in scripture. Titus would eventually go on to be Paul's co-laborer and assistant in his ministry with the Corinthians and other places (see letters to the Corinthians & the book of Titus). Titus was among the group that went to Jerusalem and the apostles in Jerusalem did not require him to be circumcised.
Galatians 2:4-5 And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Messiah Yahushua, that they might bring us into bondage: 5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
Again, the emphasis is placed on the "truth of the gospel/good news" being proclaimed rather than "another gospel." In verse 4, Paul identifies the "certain men from Judea" as "false brethren". We also see they like to work in secret. Another attribute about them can be found in Galatians 6:
Galatians 6:12-13 As many as desire to make a fair shew in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised; only lest they should suffer persecution for the cross of Messiah. 13 For neither they themselves who are circumcised keep the law; but desire to have you circumcised, that they may glory in your flesh.
So these "false brethren" were actually Torah breakers themselves but they were most interested in circumcising Gentiles so that they could go back to their Pharisee friends and brag about it. The focus on the praise of men was amongst the notable characteristics of some Pharisees of that time:
Matthew 23:4-5a For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. 5 But all their works they do for to be seen of men:
What Yahushua said about them continued to be true when Paul wrote this letter to the Galatians. They wanted to throw the weight of having to learn & keep the Torah and getting circumcised upon the necks of Gentiles before they would be accepted as having had salvation, and thus accepted into the fellowship and brotherhood of Messiah. This is not Yahushua's yoke at all.
Let's add these elements to the list of notable characteristics:
They were from Judea. (Acts 15:1)
They were "sect of the Pharisees" (Acts 15:5)
They claimed to be believers in Yahushua. (Acts 15:5)
They believed that one cannot have salvation unless they are first circumcised and/or keep the Torah. (Acts 15:1)
They were vigorous in their belief to the point that they would argue with Paul and Barnabas over it, and even approach the apostles and elders about it. (Acts 15:1,5)
They were actually "false brethren" (Gal 2:4)
They liked to sneak into the assemblies of true brethren to convert them to their own "good news" understanding of how to receive salvation. (Gal 2:4)
They didn't even keep the law themselves. (Gal 6:12-13)
They were interested in circumcising the Gentiles so that they could receive glory from men. (Gal 6:12-13)
Their sect had a history of being focused on "man pleasing" and laying heavy burdens on people that they themselves wouldn't do. (Mat. 23:4-5)
So these Pharisees regarded it as their duty to go to the Gentile believers in Yahushua and try to bring them over to "another gospel" which had their own way of receiving salvation. They apparently viewed the true good news as "bad news" for the future of their sect and they wanted to try and pervert the true good news with their doctrines.
With this understanding of what these "false brethren" were all about, let's continue reading Galatians 2:
Galatians 2:6-10 - But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: Elohim accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed [to be somewhat] in conference added nothing to me: 7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as [the gospel] of the circumcision [was] unto Peter; 8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:) 9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we [should go] unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. 10 Only [they would] that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.
So Paul tells the Galatians that the apostles and elders added nothing to the good news that Paul was proclaiming to the Gentiles. In fact, they had agreed to have Paul and Barnabas go to the Gentiles while they went to the Jews. However, Paul next reports that Peter/Kepha and Barnabas got caught up in a form of hypocrisy:
Galatians 2:11-13 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. 12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. 13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
Both "dissembled" and "dissimulation" in this context mean "hypocrisy" and are translated "hypocrisy" in most translations. But why was it hypocritical? And why was Paul bold enough to rebuke Kepha/Peter, the man who walked with Yahushua for over 3 years?
They had just had the council in Acts 15 and they had all come to Antioch to deliver the decision to the brethren (Acts 15:30-35). When all together at the council, Kepha/Peter and Barnabas both stood with Paul and agreed with the good news they had been proclaiming. So for both of them to withdraw from keeping company with the Gentiles was quite hypocritical. They were standing with the truth that Gentiles were to be accepted into the brotherhood and having salvation in Acts 15, but in practice they were withdrawing and separating themselves from them out of concern for what those of "the circumcision" might say or do.
Peter was especially at fault because he had walked with Yahushua for over 3 years and was chosen by Yahweh to first bring to good news to the Gentiles (Acts 10). At that time he was willing to fellowship with the Gentiles and defended it in Acts 11. So here was a situation where some very important leaders are sinning and causing confusion among the Gentiles by their actions, which was contrary to the decision that was made beforehand. So Paul asks:
Galatians 2:14-15 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel...
(Again we see that the primary issue here is "what is the true gospel [good news]?" Paul rebuked Kepha/Peter for not walking uprightly according to the truth of the good news.)
Galatians 2:14-15 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before [them] all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? 15 We [who are] Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
Now there are some who like to interpret this as Paul in essence saying "If you are a Jew and have rightly abandoned the law (living like a Gentile), why do you compel the Gentiles to keep the law like a Jew by only eating with the Jews?" Due to this interpretation, it is commonly understood that this is a passage that supports the doctrine of the law being abolished. But verse 15 exposes the fallacy of this interpretation when Paul contrasts the Jews with Gentiles and identifies the Gentiles as being sinners.
So while many think that Paul's statement of Peter "living after the manner of Gentiles" was a positive one, it is actually a negative one because in verse 15 Paul says we are not "sinners of the Gentiles!" In other words Paul was saying, "Peter, how are you ever going to bring the Gentiles (sinners) into living righteous life when you are an acting sinner yourself?" This was a very convicting statement to Peter that exposed his hypocrisy.
So rather than Paul's rebuke being proof that a Gentile should not keep the Torah, it was simply a rebuke that Peter himself was sinning (transgressing the law 1John 3:4) when he chose to fear man over Yahweh, pretending he was going along with a false gospel, and play the hypocrite.
This interpretation is further evidenced when we look into one of the alternative readings in older Greek manuscripts. Consider the comparison here:
The KJV reads: "why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?"
The Nestle-Aland Greek text (based on older manuscripts) reads: "How can you compel the Gentiles to live as do the Jews."
So the question wasn't "Why are you over there trying to get Gentiles (Torah breakers) to live like Jews (Torah keepers)? Don't you know the law is abolished?" The real question was "How can you ever compel the Gentiles to keep the Torah (like Jews are supposed to) if you are a sinning yourself?" Both Greek texts are compatible with the latter understanding, but the Nestle-Aland text would contradict the common Christian interpretation of these verses.
Ons vervolg volgende keer!! ☺
