December 2018
Brit Hadashah Reflections
Brit Hadashah Reflections 13
Hebraic understanding of the teaching letters of the Apostles
1 Corinthians 9 : 1 to 10 : 33
Paul first visited Corinth on his second missionary journey, in about 52 C.E., and stayed there for 18 months. The letters to the “ekklesia” in Corinth were most likely written from Ephesus about 5 years later. They are pastoral in nature.
Paul now establishes his credentials as an Apostle chosen by the Lord. It is a fact that everyone we know as an Apostle, in the Scriptures, had seen the risen Yeshua face to face. They all lived as men of great faith for sure, but it was faith strengthened in the knowledge that the Yeshua with whom they had spent three years, learning, observing, following and ministering, was now ascended into heaven, and that He had told them that He would return to the same spot, on the Mount of Olives outside Jerusalem from where they had witnessed His departure into the clouds. Paul’s encounter was different, in that he was met by Yeshua in exceptional circumstances, whilst on his way to persecute believers. That story is well known (Acts 9). But it was still a face to face encounter. So that would appear to be the Biblical qualification of an Apostle. Their mission was to build the foundation of the “ekklesia”, of which Yeshua was the chief cornerstone.
The “ekklesia” in Corinth was of special significance to Paul in that he saw them as ‘the seal of my apostleship in the Lord’. Their very existence authenticated his apostleship. But he wanted to emphasize the fact that, even though he might be entitled to ‘a living’ whist he was with them, he was careful not to be seen, in any way, to be profiting from his teaching and counsel to them. Paul was truly living a life of faith, trusting God to make provision for him. (a bit different today when MOST teachers of the Scriptures expect to be paid and to earn a living from their teaching gift, (which has Scriptural merit), but not exactly founded in trust in God for His provision, as Paul did). Paul says his reward was seeing them come to faith in Messiah Yeshua.
Then Paul puts on a “chameleon like” presence. Almost deceptive in expression, in that he declares himself to be changeable depending on the company he keeps! But that is NOT what Paul is actually saying, even though his words appear quite ‘clumsy’ in English. There is an interaction on the Greek “upo nomos” (‘under the law’). To the extent that “nomos” is a Greek interpretation of the Hebrew word “Torah”, he is talking about Jews. But adding the Greek word “upo” ‘under’, changes the sense into a legalistic type observance, wherein “upo” signifies the heavy yoke with which Paul was all too familiar … “Pharisaic Judaism”, with its protective ‘fences’ making Torah observance burdensome. In contrast, his use of the descriptive “those who are without law”, refers to Gentiles. They do not have the same ‘burden’, but the message is the same to both groups. It involves a move to be “under law towards Messiah Yeshua”. He became the living Torah, and that is what He taught during His sojourn here on earth. We are to be like Him.
The continuing theme of avoiding food offered to idols is pursued in chapter 10. Paul is unequivocal about that. However attractive some things may appear to us, he says “No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted above that which you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it.” However, as he continues, telling them to “Eat whatever is sold in the meat market”, some have incorrectly concluded that Paul was here championing the end of the Torah dietary instructions. But NO, bearing in mind that Paul, in this pastoral letter is addressing leaders of the “ekklesia”, a Messianic assembly of worshipping people, there is no way Paul would do that. It would be counter to all that Yeshua taught about righteous living wouldn’t it? Is Paul here holding his hand up to be “least in the Kingdom of Heaven”? (Matthew 5:19) I am SURE he is not.
His advice to them is, when invited to dinner by an unbelieving friend, to eat what is put before them UNLESS the host openly declares that food to have been offered to idols. Then, refusal to partake of that food will become a clear point of witness to that unbelieving friend of the change which has taken place in the life of the believing guest.
As an extension of this, Paul is advising the “ekklesia” to avoid giving offence to anyone. Live peaceably with your neighbour. Your words and your conduct WILL BE a witness to them. The question which always arises of course is whether that witness is for good. He might have also added here: -
“Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good WORKS, and glorify your Father in Heaven”.
Shabbat Shalom
RS
Brit Hadashah Reflections
Brit Hadashah Reflections 12
Hebraic understanding of the teaching letters of the Apostles
Paul first visited Corinth on his second missionary journey, in about 52 C.E., and stayed there for 18 months. The letters to the “ekklesia” in Corinth were most likely written from Ephesus about 5 years later. They are pastoral in nature.
Evidently, the leaders in the “ekklesia” had written to Paul with some pertinent questions. In response, Paul clearly exhibited the Judaism which many are taught today that he abandoned when he met Yeshua on the road to Damascus. He didn’t! Come to terms with that fact, and you will begin to understand Paul’s writings. Otherwise much of his writing seem to be contradictary to the words of Yeshua. But they are not!
“It is good for a man not to touch a woman.” This is another one of the ‘hedges’ the Rabbinate put around the Torah! And it has merit. Just as Yeshua taught that murder begins with anger, and adultery begins with a lustful look (see Matthew 5 for the full teaching), so Paul is teaching that just to touch a woman who is not ones wife is the first step to a closer, unlawful, relationship. This is precisely what is practised today in Orthodox Judaism. It is a matter which is ‘laughed to scorn’ by some in our broader society today. But Paul was concerned to teach truth about sanctity in marriage. About faithfulness in marriage. About permanence of marriage. And about the quite limited reasons for divorce when one of the marriage partners becomes a believer whilst the other does not. The onus is on the believing partner to uphold marriage sanctity unless and until the unbelieving one voluntarily departs from the marriage. Paul would later write, in his second letter (chapter 6) to this “ekklesia” that believers should not be “unequally yoked with unbelievers”, which is an additional extension of Paul’s conviction about the sanctity of marriage.
There are many appealing modern day arguments put against Paul’s teaching here, but most people reading this will know that Paul was led by the Holy Spirit in his teaching. And one thing is very sure. Conditions and circumstances may be quite variable, but human nature was the same then as it is today. Should we not say then, as the Israelites of old once said? “All that the Lord has said we will do, and be obedient”. Selah. And thereby we see the extent to which the Hebraic message is ignored in our society today, and quite significantly so in the “ekklesia”.
Now Paul moves into uncharted territory for him. Whether a person should marry or not. Specifically he is answering a question about young women in the “ekklesia”. He declared that he has no commandment from the Lord on this issue, but he has an opinion! “What was your situation when you were called into service of the Lord?” He asks. Then in an expansive and verbose response, he opines that married women are, of necessity, taken up with the affairs of the home, whilst the unmarried are not, and therefore free to give more time to the Lord’s service. Paul himself was unmarried. For him it was a happy state in that his service for the Lord was unhindered by domestic responsibility. He considered this to be ideal, and says so, but he does not detract from the state of others who, for whatever reason, find marriage to be equally fulfilling. How else, you may ask, could mankind adhere to the commandment of the Lord to be fruitful and multiply?
The “ekklesia” in Corinth was largely comprised of redeemed Gentiles. They had come out of paganism and idol worship. So they posed the question about consuming foods which had been offered to idols. They obviously could see no harm in that since they had not personally made the sacrifice. Paul appears to be somewhat ambivalent about this, except in one detail. Believers, he says, with the knowledge that our God is above all gods, and that idols are “nothing” (read Jeremiah 10), know that ‘food does not commend us to God’, in that we are no better if we do eat, and no worse if we don’t. But our consumption of this food, can be a potential stumbling block to those who are “weaker” in the faith, especially when such food is consumed in an idol’s temple! For that reason, Paul says, he would abstain from any such food, or anything else which has the potential to cause a weaker brother to stumble in faith, and be lost to our Messiah. It is also significant that this letter was written about 6 years after the decision of the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) regarding Torah teaching for Gentiles new to faith in Yeshua. So it is a little surprising that Paul did not make reference to that in his letter to this “ekklesia” in Corinth at this particular time. He does so later in the letter. As we read the teachings of Paul, it is important to bear two things in mind. Firstly, as always with Scripture, take note of the context in which the teaching is given. Secondly, it is the unique characteristic of the Scriptures that they have a universality of application. For that reason we should be careful always to ask the Lord to reveal to us that which He intends us to learn from each passage of Scripture we read.
Shabbat Shalom
RS
Brit Hadashah Reflections
Brit Hadashah Reflections 11
Hebraic understanding of the teaching letters of the Apostles
Paul first visited Corinth on his second missionary journey, in about 52 C.E., and stayed there for 18 months. The letters to the “ekklesia” in Corinth were most likely written from Ephesus about 5 years later. They are pastoral in nature.
The first four chapters of this letter dealt with some ‘contentions’ in the ranks which resulted from groups following different personalities within the “ekklesia” in Corinth. Chapter 5 opens with a serious report of sexual misdemeanour. Such a situation that was not even named in Gentile paganism, from which the recipients of this epistle had come. The offence was grave in nature, and Paul was concerned about it. (It seems that Paul had previously written to them about this (1 Cor 5:9) but copies of that letter no longer exist.) However, for him, even more alarming was the fact that it appeared to be tolerated by the leadership of the “ekklesia”, with little evidence of corrective action being taken. It seems that the offender appeared unrepentant and chose to continue in his immoral relationship whilst maintaining his position in the “ekklesia”.
Paul said that he had already considered the reports of the situation from afar and had judged the person guilty of the said misconduct. To many, this judgement might be seen to be harsh and extreme. ‘Gather the “ekklesia” together, consider me to be present with you in the Spirit, and ‘deliver such a one to Satan’”‘, was his instruction to them. Can that be right? Well that’s exactly what Paul said. But what does it mean? Each believer in the “ekklesia” was, by consent, under the protection of the Holy Spirit. By faith, each had agreed to live by the principles and ordinances prescribed by God. It is no different today. Those who voluntarily ‘join’ a church (“ekklesia”) agree to uphold the standards and the doctrines of that “ekklesia”. In principle it is a safe place where members care for and support each other. It is part of what we think of as the Kingdom of God. The ‘world’ is a very different ‘kingdom’. It is a kingdom where Satan has free reign. If anyone doubts this, just look around you. Listen to the news broadcasts or read your newspapers.
So to be “delivered to Satan”, was to be cut off from the “ekklesia”. To be outside the safety of the Kingdom of God. Then to emphasise the need for such drastic judgement Paul uses an example from ‘Pesach’, the God ‘appointed time’ (mo’ed) of remembrance (originally of the salvation of the Israelites from Egypt) but also, for us today, of the death, burial and resurrection of Yeshua. (The context indicates that this festival was about to take place, and was celebrated by this Gentile “ekklesia” in Corinth). One of God’s instructions regarding preparation for this remembrance was to clean out all the ‘leaven’ (metaphor for sin) from their homes. Then the day after Pesach, on the fifteenth day of the seventh month of the Hebrew Calendar, the Feast of Unleavened bread commences, wherein no food containing leaven was to be eaten for eight days. This is prophetic of the sinless life of Yeshua. It is a culinary fact that even a small amount of leaven in dough, leavens the whole. The analogy is immediately obvious. To make it abundantly clear, Paul then drew a distinction between the morality of those who remain in the ‘kingdom of this world’, and those who become part of the “ekklesia”. There are distinctly different standards for the latter. Those joined to the “ekklesia” were expected to live according to God’s instructions for righteous living. The biblical word for this is “Torah”. And in Corinth they were mostly a gentile “ekklesia”!
In Chapter 6, Paul opens the subject of judgement within the “ekklesia”. His instruction to them is precisely along the lines of that contained in Matthew 18. It is regrettable that a lack of Hebraic understanding of the Scriptures, has meant that we completely ignore, by misunderstanding, both the instruction of Matthew 18 and this direct chastisement of Paul to the Corinthians in our dealing with disorder within the modern day “ekklesia”. Is it any wonder that divisive elements within the “ekklesia” flourish and grow to the detriment of the whole? We seem sometimes to function as though God doesn’t even exist! Which is the essence of Paul’s letter of guidance to this “ekklesia” in Corinth.
One of the elements which diminishes the testimony of the “ekklesia” in our day is the well documented cover up of sexual sin within some of the church organizations of all denominations. The treasurer runs off with the church organist! The Sunday School teacher has an addiction to pornography! The pastor acts like a business C.E.O.! A dictator. Etc. Etc.
“Do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit … for you are bought at a price, therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s”. said Paul. His letter to the Corinthians is very practical. We need to understand it within its original Hebraic intent, unsanitized by the ‘spiritualization’ of the words. He says what he means and he means what he says.
Shabbat Shalom
RS
Brit Hadashah Reflections
Brit Hadashah Reflections 10
Hebraic understanding of the teaching letters of the Apostles
Paul first visited Corinth on his second missionary journey, in about 52 C.E., and stayed there for 18 months. The letters to the “ekklesia” in Corinth were most likely written from Ephesus about 5 years later. They are pastoral in nature.
In this week’s reading Paul opens up with a broadside against the evident ‘contention’, regarding certain aspects of doctrine, or perhaps doctrinal emphasis, which had emerged within the “ekklesia” in Corinth. He says that the ‘contention’ between them is indicative of the behaviour of ‘natural men’ rather than that of ‘spiritual men’. He opines that clinging to the views of just one of the messengers, whomsoever that may have been, is what caused division and discord, to the detriment of the true and complete message of the One who is the Master of them all. Each of those messengers are part of God’s whole. Each one of them is chosen by God for a ministry purpose. But none of them has a monopoly on truth. That is the domain of God alone.
It is a lesson that we should all learn. Paul said that during the time he was with them, he laid the foundation on which the “ekklesia” should be built. He used the analogy of a construction site. The foundation stood foursquare on the life, death, and bodily resurrection of Yeshua. It is the faith which individual believers find in His sacrificial sojourn on this earth which changes men from ‘natural men’ into ‘spiritual men’. Men who are then suitable for use in the building itself. Men who become part and parcel of the dwelling place of God Himself. The “ekklesia”. It is not a building made with hands. But there are many, all of them ‘spiritual men’, who are called to partake in the building process. The intent was to build something beautiful, showing the glory of God, but the ‘contention’ in the “ekklesia” in Corinth was causing it to become an ‘ugly’ building. Can we learn the lesson contained in this analogy?
“Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwell in you?” That alone is enough for anyone to digest. But Paul continues with a most frightening truth. “If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are.” Selah. Interestingly, I suggest, this may be applied on two levels. Firstly on an individual level, each person bearing responsibility to act and live in a manner which does not ‘defile’ his/her own temple, but also on a corporate level being applied to the “ekklesia”, wherein the actions and lifestyle of an individual causes ‘defilement’ of the whole.
Follow Paul’s line of thinking carefully here please. It is a particularly difficult thought process for us to follow because we have learned to accept Paul as an authoritative teacher, (which he is) chosen for the specific task of bringing Gentiles to faith. As we move to chapter 4 Paul emphasizes his role as a servant and steward of Yeshua, as indeed are we all who confess Him to be our Lord and Master. But using himself as the example, Paul declares that he has no knowledge of his own failings or weaknesses (other than physical ones) as a servant. So he presents himself with authority. But that alone, he says, does not justify him or make him right. For that reason, he argues, a man cannot judge himself. The ultimate judge of all is the Lord, and He chose all the teachers they were variously following! So when the brethren in Corinth made choices between different teachers, they were judging one as superior. So who are they to decide between them … and then to divide their “ekklesia” loyalties to reflect their choices.
Now today, I suspect that we are all as guilty as these brethren in Corinth because we all make similar choices in a denominational sense. But the real test we should apply in our circumstance is the degree to which the Word of God is faithfully upheld and preached. It surely would have been much more straightforward if Gentile believers in Yeshua (all zealous for the Torah as in Acts 21) had not been detached from the Hebrew roots of our faith. The division then would have remained as it was for the first believers. A choice between Messianic Judaism and Pharisaic Judaism (which Yeshua called the ‘traditions of men’).
At the end of his ‘broadside’, Paul comes out clearly with the solution. He acquaints them with the deprivations which he had endured for the sake of the gospel to bring them to faith. Read verses 11 -13. They don’t read much like prosperity teaching do they!? “I do not write these things to shame you, but as my beloved children (in the faith) to warn you.” So what is the solution? “Therefore I urge you, imitate me”. This might come over as rather boastful on Paul’s part. However, Paul had received a personal ‘one on one’ encounter with the risen Saviour. (Acts 9) That encounter resulted in a personal charge and command from God Himself. And the deprivations he described were counted worthwhile to bring them to faith. Mercifully most of us know nothing about that.
Shabbat Shalom
RS