Torah Class

How misused: The speaker challenges the common interpretation of 'you are not under law but under grace' (Romans 6:14) as meaning the Law of Moses is abolished or irrelevant for believers. While asserting that this interpretation creates conflict with Yeshua's teaching in Matthew 5:17-19, his own interpretation implies a continued *binding* of the Mosaic Law as a whole for believers, rather than understanding Paul's statement in the context of freedom from the *condemnatory power* of the Law when in Christ (Romans 8:1-4).

Scripture's answer: Paul's statement in Romans 6:14, 'For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace,' refers to believers being freed from the law's power to condemn and define their relationship with God, not from the moral principles embedded within the law. The Holy Spirit enables believers to fulfill the righteous requirements of the law (Romans 8:4), not by slavish adherence to every jot and tittle, but by a walk in love that inherently fulfills the law (Romans 13:8-10, Galatians 5:14). It does not imply that the Mosaic Law as a covenant code remains binding for Gentiles, but rather that grace empowers a new obedience from the heart (Romans 7:6; Galatians 3:23-25).

How misused: The speaker argues that when Paul refers to 'law' without the definite article 'the' in Romans 7, he means Jewish oral tradition (Halakha), not the Torah. This selective interpretation attempts to preserve the idea that the Torah itself is not the source of spiritual struggle or death, but rather man-made traditions. However, Paul's consistent usage of 'law' (nomos) in Romans, both with and without the article, contextually refers to the Mosaic Law as the standard of righteousness that reveals sin and demonstrates humanity's inability to perfectly obey in the flesh (Romans 7:7-13).

Scripture's answer: In Romans 7, Paul is discussing the human struggle with sin in relation to the divine Law (Torah), which is good and holy, but reveals and arouses sin in fallen humanity (Romans 7:7-13). While rabbinic tradition certainly played a role in first-century Jewish life, Paul's argument is fundamentally about the Mosaic Law's function in exposing sin and the need for God's grace through Yeshua to overcome the power of sin (Romans 7:24-25, 8:1-4). The absence of the definite article for 'law' (nomos) in Greek does not automatically signify 'oral tradition'; it often functions as an anarthrous noun used in a generic sense or by implication of prior reference to 'the Law' (e.g., Romans 7:2, 8:2). Paul's primary subject throughout Romans is the divine Law, which he explicitly identifies with the Ten Commandments (Romans 7:7).

How misused: The speaker explains Yeshua's statement about the 'least of these commandments' in Matthew 5:19 as a merism encompassing all commandments, and uses it to argue for a hierarchy of seriousness in commandments, concluding that Torah obedience is essential for a believer's status in the millennial kingdom. While Yeshua indeed affirms the enduring nature of the Law, the speaker's emphasis on a 'hierarchy' and 'status in the millennial kingdom' based on degrees of Torah obedience risks teaching salvation *through* or *maintenance by* works of the law, rather than obedience flowing *from* grace.

Scripture's answer: Yeshua's statement in Matthew 5:19 ('Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven') affirms the permanence and authority of God's commands. It speaks to the importance of upholding God's righteous standards. However, it should not be interpreted as establishing a system where one *earns* status in the kingdom through degrees of Law-keeping, but rather that a true disciple's heart inclination and teaching will be aligned with God's will as expressed in the Torah, and that such obedience is a fruit of salvation, not its cause or maintainer (Ephesians 2:8-10). The 'least' and 'great' refer to one's standing *within* the kingdom based on faithful adherence, not a means of entry.

How misused: The speaker critiques traditional Christian interpretations of Romans 10:4, stating that 'telos' means 'goal' or 'aim,' not 'end' or 'abolition' of the Torah, thus maintaining the Torah's perpetual validity. While 'telos' can mean 'goal,' the speaker often implies that Christ being the 'goal' of the law means the law remains fully binding as a *covenant code* for all believers, rather than understanding it as Christ bringing the law to its intended purpose and conclusion for righteousness by faith (Romans 10:4).

Scripture's answer: Romans 10:4 states, 'For Christ is the end (telos) of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.' While 'telos' can mean 'goal,' its usage here also carries the meaning of 'termination' or 'fulfillment resulting in cessation of function' for the purpose of obtaining righteousness *through adherence to the Mosaic covenant*. Christ is indeed the goal of the law in that He perfectly fulfilled its demands and revealed its ultimate purpose. However, He also brought about its termination as the means of establishing righteousness and a legal covenant for Gentiles (Galatians 3:23-25). For believers, righteousness comes through faith in Christ, not through meticulous adherence to the Mosaic Law as a means of earning or maintaining salvation. This does not abolish the moral principles of the Torah, but re-establishes them under the New Covenant and the guidance of the Spirit, whose fruits inherently reflect those principles (Galatians 5:22-23).

How misused: The speaker interprets the four prohibitions in Acts 15 (idolatry, sexual immorality, things strangled, blood) as merely 'a means to facilitate ritual purity and allow Jewish and Gentile believers to worship together, rather than as a release from all Old Testament commandments.' This interpretation minimizes the Council's decision as a definitive statement regarding Gentile believers' freedom from the full Mosaic Law, instead viewing it as a pragmatic accommodation. This aligns with a 'One Law' theology perspective, where Gentiles are still expected to eventually embrace the entirety of the Mosaic Law beyond these initial stipulations.

Scripture's answer: The Jerusalem Council's decision in Acts 15:19-20 ('Therefore, I judge that we should not trouble those who are turning to God from among the Gentiles, but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from what has been strangled, and from blood') was a deliberate declaration that Gentile believers are not required to be circumcised or to keep the full Mosaic Law for salvation or covenant standing. These four prohibitions, rooted in basic moral and purity principles (Leviticus 17-18), were considered essential for maintaining fellowship between Jewish and Gentile believers and for avoiding egregious offenses. They represent the *minimum* requirements, not an initial 'entry level' of Torah that Gentiles would later be expected to expand upon. This decision definitively established that salvation for Gentiles is by grace through faith, apart from the works of the law (Acts 15:11; Galatians 2:16).