still under the law?

Following the Bible study in Zoetermeer, on the theme of “notunder the law”, I received via Facebook a detailed response. Sympathetic and to-the-point. The writer takes the view that believers still have to submit to the law of Moses. To give you an impression how this is defended, I will first post the response of my opponent and below that, my answers (the numbers in parentheses, in red, refer to them).

Once again, with great interest did I listen to your perspective on the Word of God, but I keep having important questions as a result of your statements in your sermon of last weekend. You know, I consider my associate higher than myself and therefore, am always willing to listen to you. But as you, also, always recommend, I’m going to check out everything. That is why I am asking you to read my questions seriously. Above all, let us continue to deal with each other in love. You claim that for 2500 years, from Adam to Moses, there was no law (1). If there really was no law, why did God let the flood of Noah occur? Without law, there can not be any transgression, right? Leave alone sin? Why did God destroy Sodom and Gomorrah (2)? What law are we talking about in Gen.26:5 (3)? You say that the period of the law lasted but 1500 years and that before it and after it, there was no law (4)? Paul, it seems to me, is fairly clear, when he says that instructions have been added to the (law of) Sinai. Obviously, the whole Levitical priesthood service was ADDED. But the Torah, God’s instructions, started with Gen.1:1 and continued through to Deut.34:12. So the Torah already applied BEFORE Sinai. Or is that such a strange idea? And since there are additional laws, the chance that you are in breach of one, becomes greater, consequently, the transgression increases and so does sin. Exactly what Paul writes in Romans 5:20 (5). Your reasoning about lawmaking is not considering the complete picture. I would almost say; let’s also eliminate all legislation in the Netherlands. Wonderful freedom and joy. Would that work? Was the purpose of the State that then, they can harass the citizens with many law violations? Or was the purpose something good (6)? Namely, having rules in order to make everything work orderly and in love? What was and is your purpose in connection with raising children? Were there rules of behaviour needed (7)? I am glad that my parents raised me and chastised me when necessary. Seems quite Biblical (Proverbs 12 + 13). What would be the purpose of the Torah? A God who is Love gives rules of love! And so describes David it, also, for instance, in Psalm 119:47. Love is the essence of the Torah, is it not? Or was David not quite correct?  Ps.119 is an ode to the Torah!! And the Torah is also good!! (Rom.7:12 and 16). Things only go wrong, when you misapply the Torah (1Tim.1:8). When you apply it erroneously, then it brings the curse. Otherwise, it brings blessings. (Deut.27, 28 and 29). And because we are aware that no one can keep the Torah, Christ has removed the curse of the law (Gal 3:13). Or does it say something different in your Bible, Andre? You refer to Gal.3 in your sermon and point to the law. That is not what it says!! It says curse of the law. The law itself is much broader than the curse. So, not the law is gone, but the curse has been removed. You’re not, now, going to claim that the Torah itself is a curse, right (8)? You keep on telling that Paul, in his letters, goes against the law. I never hear you talk about the difference between the LAW OF GOD and the law of man-made rules (presently, the Talmud). The man-made rules are the ones our LORD continuously warred against and are also the ones that Paul continuously warred against in his letters (e.g. Eph.4:14, Col.2:8 and 22 and Tit.1:14). Imposing these man-made rules, that was one of the things the Judaizers tried to impose on the believers!! And it was very correct that Paul and Jesus strongly opposed that. But the Torah comes from God!! It are Divine words, unlike the man-made rules! Nowhere are the man-made rules called good (9). The worst thing was that these rules, as well as other Torah rules, were linked to justification. Exactly as you also say, the better “demands some work.” That is not grace!! That is why a Torah walk has altogether NOTHING to do with the receiving of justification. A Torah walk is simply the behaviour of a slave of Christ, just as Paul was such a slave. (1 Cor.7:22). We are bought with a price and therefore owned by our LORD. And a slave does what his LORD asks. His LORD asks no Judaism, but obedience to Him. And if you really love Him then you keep His Torah. And if you keep His Torah, then, also, the Father loves you. That is not what I say, but that says my LORD, Himself!! (John 14:15 and 21). And did that LORD have a change of mind? Read Malachi 3:6. He does not change. Why not? Because one of His names is the IMMUTABLE (1Sam.15:29). (10). Yes, even justification does not change. That is by FAITH and not by works. And that has always been true! Even with Abraham was that already so (Gen 15:6). Ishmael was conceived by WORKS, Isaac by FAITH (Sarah was already far over the date). This allegory, Paul used in Galatians 4:21-31. Israel expects(ed) it by works of the law, we by FAITH. Here it is not talking about the Torah, itself. No, here it is talking about how you receive righteousness!! I want to ask you to read this allegory again and in this light. It is NOT LAW vs. Grace, but (one’s OWN) WORK vs. FAITH. Before this becomes far too long, which it already is, just this as yet. You finish with 1Cor.9, Lawlessness and without law, those are two different, although related words in Greek, which you may, in my opinion, not readily exchange for each other. (11). Compare 1Cor.9 with 1John 3:4. You then proclaim a piece of text that is not in the original text and worse, you then proceed to give it an explanation. In vs.20 “although personally not under the law” (slide 28) is not in the original text (see interlinear) (12). Then you go to verse 21 and completely pass by the explanation “though not without the law of God” and straight to the next verse. I know of only one law of God and that is the Torah. Paul says here, crystal clearly, that he is under the TORAH of GOD (13). And quite rightly, he says that in this verse, because he speaks to the Gentiles. Otherwise, they could read your conclusion. Not now. In vs.20 that was not necessary. And yes, because he is indeed legally Christ’s. That is quite correct, and that you say, also. That is what Paul is. Andre, if Paul walked not in accordance with the Torah, as you claim, why did he make the vow in Acts 18:18? Why then did he say that, WITHOUT FAIL, he had to celebrate the upcoming feast in Jerusalem? (Pesach, see 20:6). Why did he decide to also celebrate Pentecost in Jerusalem, if possible? (20:16). And yes, then we are still missing another one, was he there also for the feast of Tabernacles (21:27) All this, since Christ had risen, was no longer necessary, was it? Or did he still adhere to the Torah? Just some questions (14).

Thanks for this comprehensive response.  Good thing I’m being checked-out! It gives me the opportunity to apply a few finishing touches. To avoid making a complete book of it, below is my answer, point by point. Sometimes, perhaps even in telegraphic style, but with the necessary references. 1. Not I claimed that from Adam to Moses there was no law. I simply quoted what Paul wrote, black-on-white, in Romans 5:13,14. 2. Prior to Moses, there was indeed sin in the world (Rom.5:13) and man knew that, too. Because each person has a conscience (Rom.2:15). Every man knows, for example, that God exists and that murder is a sin (even though the conscience can be silenced). On the basis of conscience, God could judge, as He did with the flood and the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah. 3. The laws (lit. the teachings) and commandments mentioned in Gen.26:5 referred to the promises and guidelines known to Abraham. The law of Moses was not given until centuries later (Gal.3:17). 4. Wherever the Scripture says that we are “not under the law”, it is referring to the law of Moses (Rom.3:19; Gal.4:4). 5. Rom.5:20 does not say “as there are additional laws, the chance that you are in breach of one, becomes greater. As if it would be an unintended side effect. No, it says “THAT the offense SHOULD be increasing” was the law added. 6. “The law is holy, just and good” (Rom.7:12). But the effect of any law is that it makes sin attractive (Rom.7:8-11). It already began that way in the Garden of Eden. Elsewhere, Paul says that “the power of sin is the law” (1Cor.15:56). 7. I teach (=torah!) my children. Of Course. Not to impose laws, but by enlightening them about the grace of God (Tit.2:11). And also by leading them that way and to set an example. In teaching and leading them, it is not about laws, but about knowledge (informing them). 8. Paul taught that the law of Israel was a schoolmaster until Christ (Gal.3:24). It held them “in custody” (Gal.3:23). In 2 Corinthians 3, he calls the “letters engraved on stones” a ministry of death and condemnation (:7-9). Since Christ’s death and resurrection, that is past. “No longer under a schoolmaster” (Gal.3:25) and “redeemed” (Gal.4:5). 9. You claim that Paul, in the Galatian-letter, is against all kinds of Talmudic additions to the law of Moses. But how do you come to that? Paul states that the law came 430 years after the promise to Abraham (3:17). He speaks about “mount Sinai, that bears children into slavery” (4:24). And he turns against those who want to judaize the nations (2:14), circumcise (5:2; 6:13) and submit to various feasts (4:10). All elements of the Mosaic law. 10. God is Immutable, for sure. But His instruction(=torah) to  Adam was different from His teachings to Noah. And that was different than His teachings to Abraham or later to and through Moses. God Himself is the Immutable, but there are different “administrations” (gr. oikonomia), each with its own “home-laws”. We now live in “the administration of God’s grace” that was entrusted to Paul (Eph.3:2). Even as Moses was the administrator of the law given at Sinai, so Paul is the administrator of God’s grace, in the present time. 11. The word for “lawless(ness)” is the same Greek word as “without law” in 2Thes.2:8 and 1Cor.9:21. 12. You say that the words “although personally not under the law” (1Cor.9:20) do not conform to the original text. But see HERE the word-for-word transcript. However much Paul adapted himself in practice in order to win people, he was free with respect to everyone (1Cor.9:19; Gal.5:1). 13. Paul was not without “law of God”, because the Evangel he preached, he was personally taught by Christ (Gal.1:12). That is the teaching (=the torah) of the “apostle and teacher of the nations” (1Tim.2:7) on which we have to orient ourselves, today. 14. Paul lived his life, most of the time, as a Jew and under the law. We see this in the book of Acts: he visited the temple, offered sacrifices, went, as was his custom, into the synagogue on the sabbath, etc. But that was for him not a matter of principle, but a matter of being pragmatic. He did this, according to his own words, in order to win Jews and those who are under the law. Expressly not, because he himself was under the law. Let me conclude with these words of Paul (Gal.5:1):

For FREEDOM Christ FREES us! Stand firm, then, and be not again enthralled with the yoke of slavery.

Delen: