LAW SCHOOL 101
by Richard Burkard
As my college commencement day approached, I returned to my old high school for a visit. I chatted with a few teachers, as well as my guidance counselor. She was disappointed that I chose to go directly into radio news after graduation..
"You ought to go at least one year to law school," she said - or if not that, some other graduate program. I didn't have the heart to tell her I felt the U.S. had too many lawyers already. (And this was before all those law firms started showing TV commercials.)
Little did I realize that the spiritual course I followed after college would lead me to "law school," anyway. In recent years I've faced intense instruction, not in state laws or federal statutes, but "The Law" - the Commandments of God, as first formally expressed to Moses in the book of Exodus. A proper understanding of the Law stands at the core of the Worldwide Church of God's changes of the 1990's, and the resistance of leading spinoff groups.
In the summer of 2001, the two sides seemed to debate each other from a distance in their publications. The June issue of the United Church of God's United News published an article, "Has the Law Changed?" Then in August, the Worldwide Church of God posted an online article, "The 'Law' of Matthew 5:17-19."
This combination provided a golden opportunity for me to examine all the points of the various sides, and attempt to find common ground. Here's the key passage at stake -- words of Jesus in Matthew 5:17-18: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." (NIV unless noted)
For the purposes of this article, we've boiled down the debate to several major points of discussion:
1. What is "the Law?" - Both groups seem to agree on this. UCG writes: "When Jews talked about the Law, they were referring not only to the Ten Commandments, but to that section of the Scriptures we call the Pentateuch.... the whole section they called the Torah."
WCG writes: "The 'Law and the Prophets' was a regular expression Jews of Jesus' day used to refer to the entire Old Testament." Although the article does not specifically say this, other WCG articles leave the understanding that the "Law" section refers to the first five books of the Old Testament.
2. The word "fulfill" - The UCG keeps the traditional Church of God view on the meaning of this word: "....through his life and teachings, He filled the law full, clarifying its original spiritual intent and magnifying it." The article goes on to claim, "....all has not yet been fulfilled," because Jesus has not yet returned and the "new heavens and new earth" of Revelation 21:1 have not been established.
The WCG offers four possible meanings for the Greek root of "fulfill" - including, "to accomplish or obey the Holy Scriptures," and "to bring out the full meaning of the Holy Scriptures." But the article accepts a different meaning: the Scriptures pointing to Jesus as Messiah, being fulfilled in His salvation work.
For several of Jesus's disciples, the resurrection took awhile to "soak in." Christ had to open their minds to what the Old Testament said "And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.... 'Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.'" (Lk. 24:27, 44) We must note Jesus did not say everything had been fulfilled at that moment in time.
WCG Pastor Jim Friddle once gave a detailed sermon in which he noted every time "fulfill" is mentioned in the New Testament, it's a "one-and-done" situation: once Jesus did something once, it did not have to be done again.(1) Yet this statement overlooks one important part of Matthew 5:17. Jesus talked about not only fulfilling the Law, but "the Prophets!" Has everything written about Jesus by the Old Testament Prophets been fulfilled? Isaiah 11, for example, seems to be fulfilled only in part at this time.
3. "I will magnify...." - While WCG never uses the word "magnify" in its article (in fact, it tends to reject that word in the Matthew 5 passage completely now), UCG does -- explaining this interpretation of "fulfill": "....God intended to magnify His law and make it more honorable (Isaiah 42:21). Christ kept that promise."
An interesting translational difference occurs with this verse. The King James says the Lord "....will magnify the law, and make it honourable." But the New International says, "It pleased the Lord for the sake of his righteousness to make his law great and glorious." One is future tense; the other seems at first glance to be past tense, as if already done. But a check of surrounding verses shows the NIV explains this is what God desired to do, only to be frustrated by Israel's sins. (v. 18-25)
4. The circumcision question - One of the first major New Testament "adjustments" to the Law came in Acts 15. As converts joined the early Church, "....some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, 'The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses." (v. 5)
Notice what the UCG writes about this verse: "...Some believing Pharisees saw the strong scriptural admonitions regarding circumcision, and claimed that in order to be a Christian a male had to be circumcised.... That was the law." The article goes on to suggest the statement in Deuteronomy 10:16, "Circumcise your hearts...." was misunderstood until the Holy Spirit revealed the proper meaning to the early Church.
While UCG sees one issue here, the WCG sees two. Based on the premise that "everything is accomplished" now through Jesus, the WCG article states: "....else the early Christian church and the apostles violated Matthew 5:17-19 by telling gentile Christians that circumcision and keeping the Law of Moses was not necessary."
Was this debate about merely circumcision, as a part of the "law of Moses?" Or was it about both circumcision and the law? Since one is part of the other, the UCG's approach makes sense at first glance. But look at the result of the debate later in the chapter. The apostles and elders wrote Gentile believers: "You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality." (Acts 15:29)
What do these extra points have to do with circumcision? Nothing, really -- but they were tacked on by the Jerusalem council. The UCG seemingly closes the issue at verse 11, but hurts its case by never addressing the other apparent changes in standards.(2)
5. Regulations - The UCG declares civil regulations to be one of three areas where "critical changes" have occurred in the law. "We cannot administer these regulations since the civil government of God no longer exists and these laws can only be administered within the civil government whose head is God."
One example UCG cites for this is the death penalty. Indeed, we know of no "Church of God" group currently taking rebellious children outside for stonings. (Deut. 21:18-21) Yet the question must be asked: cannot some of these regulations be administered within the Church -- where Jesus Christ is the Head? (Eph. 5:23)
Lists of the Torah's "613 commandments" are easy to find, by searching for Jewish web sites on the Internet. One list compiled by Tracey Rich contains several non-civil regulations UCG (and perhaps other spinoff groups) could administer now, but no longer does:
* #132: Sounding a shofar on the Feast of Trumpets. (Num. 29:1)
* #141: Taking palm fronds and leafy branches at the start of the Feast of Tabernacles. (Lev. 23:40)
* #172: Making loans to "a brother Israelite" with interest. (Deut. 23:20) This could be applied in a spiritual sense.
* #310: Prophesying falsely. (Deut. 18:20, 22) Why this was never applied to ministers such as Roderick Meredith and Gerald Waterhouse remains a mystery. (Couldn't they be disciplined, short of killing them?)
On the other hand, the WCG seems to pass on regulating any of the 613. It returns to Matthew 5 to comment indirectly on this matter: "Jesus also said that 'not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen' from the entire body of the Jewish Holy Scriptures would disappear until 'everything is accomplished....' we would be forced to say that he was commanding Christians to follow all the laws of the Law and Prophets, or the Old Testament. At the least, we would have to conclude he was making the entire Law of Moses binding on Christians."(3)
6. Rituals and sacrifices - Both UCG and WCG agree major changes in worship occurred with the downfall of the Jerusalem temple in 70 A.D. As UCG puts it: "The sacrifices and rituals of the temple are no longer necessary because they all pointed to Christ.... Christ's priesthood now supercedes that of the Levites (Hebrews 7:11-28).... This portion of the law is now administered by Christ instead of the Levites."
Do you see a problem with that last sentence? It implies Jesus administers only parts of the law now. If He's the "head of the church," why isn't He over all of it?
WCG sees the issue from a broader perspective, emphasizing the administration of religious or spiritual regulations more than specific rituals. "....Christian men would have to be physically circumcised. All Christians would have to offer sacrifices. Men, at least, would have to travel to Jerusalem to keep the annual festivals. Christians would have to keep the various purification rituals."
In short, WCG argues the entire law stands or falls based on Jesus's words in Matthew 5 -- and it concludes the law has fallen. But in doing so, WCG includes this quote from the Tyndale New Testament Commentary:
The focus is now on Jesus and his teaching, and in this light the validity of Old Testament rules must now be examined. Some will be found to have fulfilled their role, and be no longer applicable...others will be reinterpreted.
This is essentially the UCG viewpoint as well. The dispute lies in what points of the law should be reinterpreted, and which no longer apply. WCG argues since Jesus didn't specifically mention the Sabbath or Ten Commandments in Matthew 5, no exception is made for them. UCG would say since they're not mentioned and Jesus has not come back, they still do apply.
7. The meaning of "forever" - The WCG article contains this quote comparing the old and new covenants: "But heaven and earth will pass away, and by contrast, Jesus' own words will remain forever (Matthew 24:35). They have a greater validity than the Law because Jesus is greater than Moses."
Now wait a minute here! This statement is strikingly strange for several reasons:
* Hasn't the WCG taught recently that "'forever" doesn't really mean forever? Weren't members told verses such as Psalm 119:152 - "Long ago I learned from your statutes that you established them to last forever" - really meant "as long as the conditions exist?" (See also Isa. 40:8) Admittedly, that explanation was put on the Hebrew rendering of the word, not the Greek.
* Hasn't the WCG taught some of Jesus's words don't apply to the Church today? If so, then how can those words "remain forever" - and has their validity disappeared? We have an article examining this issue. We also have a separate Bible study on the word "forever."
* As God in the flesh, Jesus's words can have "greater validity" -- but does this mean Moses's words are invalid? On several occasions, words of Moses are actually words spoken to him by God. (Example: Exodus 20-23) To declare these "words of Moses" really creates a false choice.
8. The collision in Colossians -- The UCG brings up one of the peskiest points in the debate over the status of the Law: Colossians 2:16-17. Using the KJV as its basis, the article says: "No man should judge us, Paul contends, because God is our Judge and he has ordained that we keep the Sabbath and the Holy Days. Why? Because these things are (not were) a shadow of things to come."
The problem is that other translations disagree with that conclusion. Look at verse 17 in the NIV: "These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ." The Contemporary English Version agrees with that view - but the New American Standard and Moffatt translations do not.
In addition, the New Bible Commentary: Revised suggests the keeping of Holy Days is not really the ultimate issue here: "Paul is here referring to any system which makes salvation dependent on the observance of certain food taboos or rigid adherence to the observance of certain days as sacred." (1970 ed., p. 1148, emphasis ours) Church of God groups tend to dance around the question of whether you can be saved without keeping these things. Some say absolutely not; others suggest you can, but your reward in the Kingdom of God may be reduced.
Summary: Church of God groups which pointed fingers at former President Clinton for "parsing words" really should examine themselves instead. Denominations do it all the time with the Bible and doctrines. We've touched on some examples here -- words such as "fulfill," "forever," "are" and "were," which cause division and disagreement.
A member in my congregation says most church denominations follow pre-set "road maps" when it comes to their beliefs. Everything they teach is squeezed into the "road map" passed down by decades of tradition, even if it challenges that tradition. That's true in Church of God groups as well, if we're honest enough to admit it.
We've shown both the Worldwide and United maps have flaws, when it comes to explaining the basic issues of the law. Yet there are basic areas of agreement - on what Jesus meant by the Law, and at least certain adjustments made to it because of events in the first century.
Wherever you stand on these issues of law, I suggest you do what males are notorious for doing. Throw away the road maps -- and let God's Word speak to you, without the pre-set notions of any church or human being. (Or hey -- even me.) May God guide you through His Spirit to find the proper path, the "narrow road," that leads to eternal life. (Mt. 7:14)
+++++++++++++++++
1. "Testimony of Jesus, The Messiah," presented in San Francisco, CA WCG, 5/13/95.
2. Acts 15:24 in the KJV seems to reinforce the point of the discussion, by saying "Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law," yet no other translation is that specific. For instance, Moffatt says some people "have unsettled you with their teaching and upset your minds..."
3. A key passage of Scripture in sorting out this issue is Hebrews 10:1-18 -- dealing with the new covenant and "laws in their hearts." But neither article addresses that passage, so we will not do so here.
In addition, we received an article, "Faith, Grace and Torah," from a Messianic Jewish web site called Nazarene.net. It claims the New Testament actually has more commandments than the Old - more than 1,000 in all!
To respond to this article, e-mail the author
c. 2001-11 Richard Burkard, All Rights Reserved.