'Magna Carta, Religion and the Rule of Law' (Ed. R Griffith-Jones and M Hill, CUP, 2015, 414 pages)

Paperback ISBN 9781107494367, RRP £24.99, hardback ISBN 9781107100190, RRP £64.99

This volume contains seventeen essays on a variety of topics from a wide array of expert contributors - jurists, theologians, historians - each with a worldwide reputation in their field. Together with an introduction by the two editors and a fascinating and informative keynote address by Lord Judge, the result is a substantial offering towards the anniversary debate on the relevance of Magna Carta and its relationship to religion and law.

The book has been compiled from talks given at a 2014 conference at Temple, London, with additional papers by other scholars unable to attend. The overall theme of the well-attended gathering was that of faith and governance, a critical topic for today. Within that overarching agenda, there were three main subsections into which the book has been organised.

The opening chapters concern the birth of Magna Carta and the spread of its principles. Included here is an account of the role and influence of Magna Carta on ideas about religion and the rule of law in the colonial and revolutionary periods of American history.

The following section debates comparative religious approaches to Magna Carta's rule of law. The conference's brief was to take account of religious diversity and included contributors from non-Christian faiths. Here are discussions, perhaps rather tangential to the main theme, on the origins of the rule of law in Islam, justice in Islamic legislation, Sharia and the rule of law. There are also lessons drawn from India as well as Magna's Carta 'still small voice' in Christian traditions.

Whilst the book is grounded in a respect for today's pluralistic religious culture, the chapter on Magna Carta's biblical principles is especially illuminating."

The final section focuses on the contemporary inheritance of Magna Carta, including the development of human rights from then until the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Of particular interest are essays on the possible links between Magna Carta and the European Convention on Human Rights, and Strasburg's approach to religion in pluralist European democracies.

The chapter on Biblical principles and Magna Carta, written by former Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, is especially illuminating. Sacks insists that although Magna Carta can be read as a historical, constitutional or legal document, "it was first and foremost a religious document." (p301). Highlighted here is Archbishop Langton's original desire to create a Biblical, covenantal kingship in England, based upon what Moses had commanded in Deuteronomy. In this chapter we learn that "the torch handed down from Magna Carta to the present day is a torch that Langton had fuelled from the Bible he knew so well" (p302). Sacks strongly advocates that a covenantal basis for society founded upon the Judaeo-Christian ethic is just as relevant today.

In summary, the book's particular vantage point is the "monolithic English Church as it existed in 1215 and the plural and diverse faith communities of today's more secular age." (p3).

The appendix provides translations of the original 1215 version of Magna Carta side-by-side with the fourth version of 1225, showing how the charter developed in its early life. The book concludes with an extensive bibliography and a substantial subject index, very helpful for those wanting to pursue a topic across the many diverse chapters.

It is difficult to disagree with Lord Judge's assertion: here is an analysis of Magna Carta's significance unlikely to be equalled elsewhere."

This compilation might be rather technical and advanced for the casual reader but it is difficult to disagree with Lord Judge's assertion that here is a dissection and analysis of the significance of Magna Carta unlikely to be equalled by any other group of scholars. Certainly there is a wealth of factual information and ideas to ponder, and the whole project is a testimony to Magna Carta's iconic power and lasting legacy.

Clifford Denton continues the study of Acts 15 by considering the context and conclusion of the meeting of apostles and elders in the First Century.

Recap

In the first part of our study, we argued that the Acts 15 meeting of apostles and elders was according to Jewish tradition for settling disputes, whose origin can be traced to the time of Moses. It was perhaps the first council of its kind in the emerging Christian community. We can adopt this view providing we maintain a balanced perspective of continuity from biblical origins rather than a breaking away to form a new religion. The apostles and elders were responsible, as are Church leaders today, to shepherd the body of disciples, including both Jews and Gentiles, to be the authentic manifestation of the covenant community of faith.

The outpouring of the Holy Spirit had begun in the Gentile world and the leaders met in Jerusalem to consider together what the God of Israel was now doing, and what he was expecting of his people.

The apostles and elders met in Jerusalem in accordance with Jewish tradition, to consider what God had begun in the Gentile world and what he was expecting of his people."

All this was happening in the context of the Jewish world of the Sanhedrin and the Rabbis, who to that time had interpreted biblical teaching into a set of rules for living. This was the world into which Jesus came, challenging the Rabbis but recognising their authority – that is until the coming of the Holy Spirit to empower his disciples in a new and living way.

Let us consider a little more of the rabbinical teaching of the day to further understand the need for the council of Acts 15.

Rules and Obligations

Jewish tradition has it that there are two aspects to Torah: the Written Torah, recorded by Moses, and the Oral Torah passed on from Moses through reliable men. The Oral Torah was codified (developed in written form) in the Second Century into what is known as the Mishnah. This was some time after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD when concerns arose as to whether oral traditions would be remembered with the Jewish nation scattered throughout the world. Once the teaching was passed on orally, but now it was codified for fear that the teaching would be lost to future generations.

In our own generation, we can read the Mishnah to study these oral traditions. Here we find much of what was taught by the Rabbis at the time of Jesus and his Apostles. A study of the Mishnah gives us information that helps us to understand the basis of Jesus' challenges to the Rabbis. For example there is an incident recorded in Matthew 12 concerning the rabbinic definition of work and its relationship to the Sabbath Day. The disciples of Jesus, in the eyes of the Pharisees, contravened a number of their definitions of the work of harvesting when they ate grain as they walked through the fields. This incident and others are understood most clearly through reference to the Oral Traditions recorded in the Mishnah.

In Jesus' day, to be a Jew implied obedience to the authority of the oral traditions and extra rulings of the Rabbis."

Jews were expected to govern their lives through obedience to oral traditions and other rulings of the religious leaders. The different schools of Rabbis formulated rules by which their disciples were obliged to live – the legal halakhah of the day. To be a Jew implied that such obligations were authoritative. Circumcision for men was the entry point into the Jewish family and everything else followed. This is the background to Acts 15.

The Perceived Authority of the Mishnah

In the introduction to Danby's translation of the Mishnah (OUP, 1933), there is a passage that relates the chain of the Oral Torah's passage down through the centuries. Because the Oral Torah was considered to go back to Moses it was considered just as authoritative as the written Torah.

Recall that Jesus referred to the teaching of the Rabbis sometimes as, "You have read" and sometimes, "You have heard it said", reflecting both the written and oral nature of rabbinic teaching:

The Mishnah's own account of its origin and history of the Oral Law is given in the tractate Aboth. At the same time that the Written Law was given from Sinai, the Oral Law, too, was delivered to Moses, and handed down (orally) in turn to the leaders of successive generations – to Joshua, to the Elders (Joshua 24:31), to the Prophets, to the 'Men of the Great Synagogue' (the body of teachers who administered and taught the Law after the time of Ezra), to Simeon the Just (c.280 or 200 B.C., one of 'the remnants of the men of the Great Synagogue'), to Antigonus of Soko; then, in turn, to the five 'Pairs of leaders' – Jose ben Joezer and Jose ben Johanan (c.165 B.C.), Joshua ben Perahyah and Nittai the Arbelite, Judah ben Tabbai and Simeon ben Shetach, Shemaiah and Abtalion, and Hillel and Shammai. Thus the chain of tradition was brought to the threshold of the Christian era.

On account of this chain of reliable men it is considered that the Oral Torah is of equal authority to the Written Torah in Judaism. As the Introduction to the translation of the Mishnah states, after the above paragraph:

The Mishnah, in other words, maintains that the authority of those rules, customs, and interpretations which had accumulated around the Jewish system of life and religion was equal to the authority of the Written Law itself, even though they had no place in the Written Law.

Students of the Rabbis

Along with the culture of oral traditions went the zeal for the Scriptures of every student from a Jewish background. The abiding issue was to know just what was expected in how to live in every part of life. The Mitzvot (Commandments) were obligatory and binding and it was a person's duty to apply them into his or her life.

Even though both the Written and Oral Torah were assumed to have been passed on flawlessly they still needed to be interpreted in every generation. Hence the Councils of Elders determined halakhah, whether in the Synagogue Bet Din at local level, or through the Sanhedrin, on more weighty matters, at national level. Though the origin of the term halakhah (also spelled halachah) is to walk out one's duty to God, it became a legal term meaning, to a Jew, those things that were legally binding on his life.

As each generation interpreted the Torah into halakhah, to know just how to live, halakhah became less about relationship with God and more an expression of legal duty."

On matters of Torah, a member of the Jewish community should seek guidance from his Rabbi on matters which needed interpretation. There were also rules for whose interpretations were binding. For example, in Popular Halachah: A Guide to Jewish Living (edited by Avnere Tomaschoff and sponsored by the World Conference of Jewish Organisations, 1985) it states:

The halachic decision of a contemporary Rabbi is binding upon the person who poses the question; he may not attempt to receive a more lenient opinion by bringing the same question to another Rabbi unless he advises the second Rabbi of the opinion that he had previously received.

This was the background to the Jewish world of the Apostles in Jerusalem at the meeting recorded in Acts 15. They met as a Bet Din to discuss how the Gentiles coming to faith should be brought into the community where the laws and traditions of Torah were to be interpreted and it was to be discovered what was obligatory and binding.

This was the background of the Bet Din in Jerusalem in Acts 15: how should Gentiles be brought into the community steeped in the interpreted laws and traditions of the Torah?

The most prominent issue was whether circumcision was necessary for Gentile converts, but implicit in the deliberations was every aspect of the Torah, since to be circumcised in the flesh implied coming under the authority of the teachers of Judaism according to the current traditions.

Freedom to Learn

With these thoughts in the background, we realise that the Acts 15 meeting was simply a meeting in Jerusalem of those with authority from Jesus, guided by God's Spirit (in the continuity of Covenant history and Jewish tradition), to see how Gentile converts should approach Torah. Was there a new way or should Gentile converts come under the authority of the rabbis?

An inspired conclusion was reached. A letter was sent out to new believers in the Gentile world, after which the Gospel continued to go out into the Gentile world with spiritual power. The four things that are mentioned in the letter were not binding in the sense of normal Jewish halakhah, but very important and necessary, nevertheless, for the good of every believer:

The apostles, the elders, and the brethren, To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia: Greetings. Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, "You must be circumcised and keep the law" -- to whom we gave no such commandment -- it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth.

For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell. (Acts 15:23-29)

Both the content of the letter and the spirit of the letter are important. The four things mentioned are also known as the Noahide Laws, principles traditionally thought to have been given to Noah after the Flood, and so for all mankind. This does not mean that these are the only four things relevant to believers from the Old Testament. Noah was a man of faith and fellowship with God, just as Abraham was; faith was the major principle of the Old Testament as well as the New. Neither Noah nor Abraham knew the Torah ('Law') in the sense that it was given through Moses, but they both had a heart to walk closely with the living God (the true halakhah, one might say).

In all generations, the one thing of which a person must be careful in seeking to walk with the true God is to avoid those things that might be a seduction towards following false gods. The four injunctions contained in the letter were typical of the traps to avoid if one was to not be seduced into idolatry. Thus the letter, the ruling from the Acts 15 meeting (so to speak), warned new believers to beware of following false gods so that they might learn to walk out their faith in fellowship with the One True God of Israel.

Each of the four Noahic principles given to new believers referred to typical traps which might seduce them into following false gods. They were intended to protect and support their faith and fellowship with the One True God."

Secondly, we see in the spirit of the letter that was foreseen by Jeremiah of the New Covenant:

But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more. (Jer 31:33-34)

The reason why other aspects of Torah were not specifically mentioned is that the Holy Spirit inspired the elders in Jerusalem to see that, in future, Torah would be studied in terms of New Covenant revelation, in which the Holy Spirit would be the agent of such revelation. The emphasis was to be on teaching those with a heart to learn more than through externally imposed obligations.

The remainder of God's law would not be externally imposed, but written on the hearts of believers through the revelation of the Holy Spirit, as Jeremiah had previously prophesied. "

Relevance Today

It was not that a new religion was beginning, but that the faith and walk of Abraham was to be brought to the Gentile world by the power of the Holy Spirit. This was nevertheless a continuity of Covenant history within the context of the Jewish traditions of authority and searching out the interpretation of Torah for the emerging sect of the Jews into which Gentile converts were grafted.

We continue to live in the flow of Covenant history. We are connected to our history through the Council of Jerusalem of Acts 15. Through this Council, or Bet Din (as we now understand it), we learned not about the departure from the Jewish Roots of our faith but how Torah and halakhah would be taken to the Gentile world by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Through Acts 15, we learn not about departing from the Jewish roots of our faith, but how Torah and halakhah - the faith and walk of Abraham - would be taken to the Gentiles through the power of the Holy Spirit."

With freedom to learn for everyone who is a disciple of Yeshua, our Jewish and Hebraic roots are as secure as for anyone in the Covenant community, right through from Abraham's day to our own.

For Study and Prayer

1. In the light of what we have considered concerning the context and interpretation of Acts 15, how should Christians approach study of the Old Testament?
2. Do you see any parallels with the way the rabbis exercised authority through tradition with what happens in some branches of the Christian Church today?

Next time: Paul and the Torah

These studies are developed from the course Christianity's Relationship with Israel and the Jews, first prepared for Tishrei Bible School.

What is the law of God and how does it relate to prophecy? Edmund Heddle continues his series by unpacking this key topic...

Prophets are people with standards. They believe that certain standards of belief and behaviour have been laid down by Almighty God; standards which they, like the rest of mankind, are duty bound to live up to.

However, as prophets, they have the added responsibility of upholding these standards against a background of universal human rebellion by urging everyone, irrespective of their power or position, to full obedience.

In other words, a prophet is a person commissioned by God to make plain what his laws are, in order that people may comply with his requirements and so escape the otherwise grave consequences of disobedience.

Against a background of human rebellion, prophets have the responsibility to uphold God's standards of belief and behaviour and urge others to do the same."

Prophets' Warning

There is clear evidence from the Old Testament that both rulers and their people were warned by prophets sent by God to obey the laws they had received from Moses.

The prophet Ahijah warned King Jeroboam against following Solomon's bad example and urged him to obey God's laws and to keep his commandments (1 Kings 11:30-38). Another prophet, Azariah, encouraged King Asa to turn from idolatry and to start observing God's law, after a lapse of many years (2 Chron 15:1-15).

A summary passage following Israel's being sent away into exile says:

Yet the LORD warned Israel and Judah by every prophet and by every seer, saying: Turn from your evil ways and keep my commandments and my statutes, in accordance with all the law which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets (2 Kings 17:13)

Another passage relates a similar situation when, years later, Judah was also taken away into captivity (Jer 25:4-6).

God's Concern

Jeremiah points out that God's intention in sending prophetic warnings was for their good, that "it might be well with them" (Jer 7:23). That such obedience would be "for their own good, and the good of their children after them" (Jer 32:39). The measure of God's concern is shown in an oft-repeated phrase which occurs nine times in Jeremiah (7:13; 7:25-26; 11:7-8; 25:3-¬4; 26:4-6; 29:19; 32:33; 35:14-15; 44:4): "Since the day that your fathers came out of the land of Egypt until this day, I have sent you all My servants the prophets, daily rising early and sending them."

The King James translation preserves the picturesque quality of the phrase by rendering it 'rising up early and sending' (that is, rising up early and speaking/protesting/teaching). This is an attempt to render a Hebrew verb shakam, which means 'to incline the shoulder to take a burden, to load a burden on the back of a man or a beast': because this would be done in the early morning at the beginning of the day's work, it took to itself the significance of 'starting early in the morning'.

Many times in Jeremiah the verb 'shakam' is used: it is a verb which paints a beautiful picture of God getting up early in the morning and taking great care to dispatch his servants on their mission"

This beautiful picture of God getting up early to ensure that his prophets were dispatched on their mission of mercy to his people is not quite so striking when this word is rendered by 'persistently' (RSV), 'day after day, again and again' (NIV) or by 'eagerly and earnestly' (Moffatt). Prophets today need a similar dedication if they are to save others, whether individuals or communities, from the consequences of breaking God's laws. For if they allow people to go on despising God's laws this will inevitably result in a situation for which there is 'no remedy' (2 Chron 36:15-16).

God's Law Different

The Roman empire was held together not primarily by its Emperor as dictator, but by Roman law, that 'lex' which was so highly regarded by all true Roman citizens. But when we speak of the law of Moses, we are referring to something different. It is true that Roman law originally grew out of Roman religion. It was believed that the founders of the Roman state had entered into a pact with certain gods and that they would guard Rome, provided the lex was observed.

But by New Testament times, the religion of Rome had lost its hold on educated men and the lex was no longer vitally connected with religion. The Law of Moses, in contrast, was unchangeably connected with the worship of the one true God.

The Hebrew 'Torah'

The Hebrew word standing for God's law is 'Torah'. The root of this word is the Hebrew word to 'teach' which is a form of the verb 'to shoot', the idea being that a man might shoot an arrow to show direction. This is the word used for the Law of Moses and in contrast with the Roman lex, it conveys the idea of instruction, rather than legalism (the word 'legalism' is connected with 'lex').

At the heart of God's law is not legalism, but principles, revelation and words to govern a personal relationship"

The 'Torah' contains instruction, revelation and 'words', an element not to be found in any modern law book. The Ten Commandments were originally called 'These words' (Deut 5:22). Together these items give the principles that govern Israel's covenant relationship with Jehovah God and they imply a personal relationship between the teacher and the taught.

God's 'Segullah'

The introduction to God's law is a reminder of what he had done to bring Israel into existence as a nation. It was because of what he had done for Israel first that she in turn must obey his commands as the only fitting response to such undeserved kindness:

You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I brought you to myself. Now, therefore, if you will obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my own possession among all peoples... (Ex 19:4-5); literally, you shall be my 'segullah'.

George Knight in his book Law and Grace explains the meaning of segullah: "In olden days a king was the ultimate owner of everything in the land he ruled. He owned every building, every farm...But that kind of 'owning' could give him little personal satisfaction. Consequently in his palace he kept a treasure chest of his 'very own', in which he delighted to store the precious stones and objets d'art which he loved to handle. This treasure box was his 'segullah'. The whole object of God's law is that Israel might be his 'segullah'. All nations belonged to him, but Israel was to be his peculiar treasure (compare 1 Peter 1:9). How strangely does the attitude of the Pharisees of Jesus' day contrast with all this when they tried to deduce from God's law regulations to suit every possible contingency in human life."

Ceremonial Law

We are learning that the voice of the true prophet is always the voice of the law of God, once for all declared through Moses. What then of those passages in the Old Testament where the prophets appear to reject the ceremonial system of blood sacrifices, preferring obedience to ceremony? "To obey is better than sacrifice" (1 Sam 15:22). "I desire steadfast love, not sacrifice" (Hos 6:6). "What to me is the multitude of your sacrifices? says the Lord... I do not delight in the blood of bulls...incense is an abomination to me...your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hates" (Isa 1:11, 13-14).

These and other verses like them may seem to indicate a total rejection of religious ceremony on the part of the prophets. In the Isaiah passage the attack on the offering of sacrifices is very strong, but it is no stronger than the prophet's attack on the Sabbath (v13) and on prayer (v15). It cannot be that the prophet is repudiating the Sabbath or prayer. Rather he is saying that unless sacrifice is the expression of the heart's devotion of the worshipper it is of itself not only useless, but very offensive to the Almighty. The keeping of the Sabbath and the offering of prayer is also an offence if it is a cover up for sinful deeds and selfish ways.

Prophetic Theology

In their understanding of God and his ways, the prophets built on the earlier revelation given to Moses and did not question it. Peter Southwell in his book Prophecy (p63) says:

Prophetic theology is parasitic, it stood upon the shoulders of its predecessors and needed the older traditions for its sustenance.

However, having granted that the theology of the prophets is firmly based on the Law of Moses, they did not stop there but went on to speak of a coming king, a suffering servant, a new covenant, an abundant outpouring of God's Spirit and a glorious new age, when nature, as well as people would be totally renewed. They moved on from a law inscribed on tablets of stone to the law of God written in the hearts of His people.

The prophets' theology was firmly based on the Law of Moses; from here they spoke of a coming king, a new covenant, an abundant outpouring of God's Spirit and a glorious new age."

And when eventually Jesus came in fulfilment of the promises they had unveiled, he declared that the teaching of law and prophets would not be abolished - both were equally important and he would himself fulfil both (Matt 5:17). Prophets today must remember that they are responsible to proclaim the total Lord Jesus, who fulfils all that the law and the prophets have said about him.

Prophetic Continuity

As JA Motyer has pointed out in the New Bible Dictionary (p1045):

Prophets and prophecy form the greatest line of continuity between the Old and New Testaments. The prophetic line did not end with Malachi, so to speak, but with John the Baptist. This is the express teaching of our Lord: 'For all the Prophets and the law prophesied until John' (Matthew 11:13).

John continued the pattern of Old Testament prophecy as he insisted upon repentance for disobedience to God's law, and then combined both proclamation (forthtelling) and prediction (foretelling) as he spoke of the wrath to come but also of the grace to come (Luke 3:7, 16). The message that John had for his generation is that which today's prophets must pass on to their generation too.

Prophets to the Nations

The message brought by the prophets of the Old Testament was not delivered only to Israel and Judah. They also had things to say to the nations, small and great, of their day (see Isa 13:1-23:18). In the Book of the Revelation (Ch 10), the angel said to John: "Take the scroll and eat it; it will be bitter to your stomach, but sweet as honey in your mouth..." John was told, "You must again prophesy about many peoples and nations and tongues and kings." There are things to be said not only to the Church of those who believe, but also to the nations.

Prophets were not only sent to Israel and Judah, but also to the nations, small and great."

God said to the young Jeremiah: "I have appointed you a prophet to the nations...I have set you today over nations and kingdoms" (Jer 1:5, 10). This was by no means an easy task and at times it was a bitter one. But, as the angel told John, there is also a sweetness that increases the more we digest the law and the prophets.

There can never have been a time when the nations have so desperately needed to hear what God's prophets are commissioned to say. God's standards apply to all men everywhere. It is part of the prophet's calling to declare what they are and to tell of the grace that can write them on our hearts.

First published in Prophecy Today, Vol 2, No 1, 1986.

Clifford Denton completes his study of the relationship between law and grace.

Recap: Law and Grace Part 1

In this series we are tracing what some have called "the parting of the ways between the Church and the Synagogue". Our concern is with the identity and origin of the Christian Church, because there are serious consequences of its separation from the roots of our faith- for both Christians and Jews.

One consequence is the way in which we read our Bibles. Separation from our roots brings a conceptual break in the continuity of the Scriptures. We have paused in our historical survey in order to illustrate this important point. In the first part of this study we explored what the word law might mean, as found in the New Testament. We differentiated between the Torah (teaching of God), and its interpretation into Halakhah. We reasoned that there is a difference between interpretations that bring legal bondage to those which encourage a walk with God under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

We must not allow ourselves to be robbed of the freedom that is given for living out a biblical lifestyle under the grace and leading of the Holy Spirit. However, it is not the Torah that is at fault – it is the way Torah is interpreted."

Rebuilding relationship between Jews and Christians

Reconciliation with the Jewish community is something of great importance in our day and should be a consequence of the Christian Church being properly rooted in all aspects of life and faith. Those who value the Torah are not necessarily walking a wrong path and need not necessarily be bound up in legalism. To be free to explore afresh our common heritage should build bridges of reconciliation, since to not care for the Torah has been a symptom of not caring about our relationship with the Jews.

Dr Marvin Wilson has spent many years in the pursuit of reconciling Christians and Jews. In his book Our Father Abraham, Dr Wilson poses some strong questions about accusations of Judaising levelled at Christians, who are exploring the roots of their faith with freedom whilst remaining sure of their salvation:

To those in the modern Church concerned about the dangers of Judaising after nineteen hundred years of de-Judaising, we would pose these questions: Is it Judaising to seek to reconstruct certain aspects of the first-century Jewish context of the New Testament and early Church? Is it Judaising to investigate the life and teaching of Jesus through Jewish eyes? Is it Judaising to find personal fulfillment by adopting personal perspectives on God and one's neighbour that emerges from the teaching of the Hebrew prophets?

Is it Judaising to resonate positively to a Jewish pattern of worship, music, and celebration of special events in life? Is it Judaising to find in modern Israel – within its people and the historic land itself – that for which you deeply care, a veritable laboratory filled with spiritual and historical meaning? To each of the above questions we would answer an emphatic no!¹

On the one hand, we must beware of the warnings gleaned through the Scriptures, concerning denial of salvation through faith, in favour of ritual observance of 'the law'. We must avoid an artificial self-righteousness resulting from a wrong view of the teaching (Torah) of God.

We must avoid the legalism of ritual observance of 'the law'. However, we must also avoid going too far the other way: rejecting the beneficial teachings of Scripture and our opportunity to freely discover the Jewish heritage of Christianity"

On the other hand, we must also recognize when a bondage of a different kind is being imposed: namely, when the accusation of Judaising is incorrectly levied, restricting us from freely practising the beneficial teachings of Scripture, as discovered from the Jewish roots of Christianity. We cannot avoid facing this challenge when we seek to restore the Christian faith to its relationship with Israel and the Jews.

The Torah is good

The whole of Israel's life, before the writing of the New Testament, and the context from which the Gospel was sent, was founded upon the teaching of God. The task over all history was to accurately interpret the teaching of God into everyday life. The Hebrew word for this teaching is Torah - teaching for a right direction in life.

The Torah is God's teaching for a right direction in life. In the New Covenant, it becomes a living walk in the Spirit, received in the heart.

The word Torah does not appear in translations of the New Testament. This was not because God's teaching was done away with: it is because of the poor translation into the word law. Indeed, Jesus made that important point very clearly during His great teaching of the Sermon on the Mount:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law [Torah] 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 [Torah] until everything is accomplished.

Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law [Torah], you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven. (Matt 5:17-20)

Read carefully and with the mindset of the continuity of Scripture, we understand that the Sermon on the Mount was spoken to the disciples of Jesus in the early stages of the New Covenant. The New Covenant brought the interpretation of Torah as the walk in the Spirit, where Torah was received in the heart rather than on tablets of stone. Jesus' teaching kindled new light in the understanding and purpose of Scripture. In his great sermon Jesus was referring to the Torah, the teaching of God, which He had come to interpret correctly and not replace.

This explains why Paul can warn his readers about misapplication of the Torah of in the letter to the Galatians, and also say that the Torah is good in Romans (Romans 7:12). Our salvation does not depend on ritual obedience to the Torah of God. Those who teach the opposite have denied the sins of the flesh that need a remedy beyond what the will of fallen man can itself accomplish. Jesus came to be our sacrifice for sin in fulfillment of the sacrificial requirements of God in his Torah so that we would be free from the impossible burden of trying to earn our own salvation.

Far from Jesus changing the teaching of God, Torah includes what Jesus has done for us through his sacrifice, to atone for those of God's requirements that we cannot reach for ourselves. He has atoned for our sins - those things we do that cause us to fall short of the perfection of Torah.

Our salvation does not depend on ritual obedience to the Torah of God. But the life to which God's teaching points is still our goal- by the help of the Holy Spirit, and by faith."

Being aware of our shortcomings, however, does not mean that we should neglect the teaching of God and the right application in our lives. The life to which God's teaching points us is still our goal by the help of the Holy Spirit, and by faith in Jesus' covering of our sins. Torah, rightly interpreted, still shows us what is good, and the Sermon on the Mount shows us that God's teaching has depth of meaning that can be missed by superficial study.

We must weigh carefully our English understanding of the word law, what is meant by the New Testament word nomos (the Greek word for law), and the Hebrew understanding of Torah and halakhah. In right balance, we see that the New and Old Testaments are compatible in conveying the full range of God's teaching. All of God's teaching, rightly interpreted, is good.

So now let us turn to the meaning of grace, attempting to further achieve a balanced understanding.

Grace

By the word 'grace', we understand God's unmerited favour. God put Adam and Eve (and, as a consequence, all their descendants) outside of the Garden of Eden. He left us with the weakness of our flesh and the temptation to sin. Yet, he did not abandon us. Over the few thousand years since then he has shown us that he is outworking a plan for redeeming a community from this earth for all eternity. His plan is worked out through the principle of covenant, revealed progressively through the Patriarchs and fulfilled through Jesus the Messiah.

It is a useful exercise to go back, conceptually, to the time of Adam and look forward, as if through a telescope. From such a viewpoint, in the distance is the coming of Jesus and his sacrificial death on the Cross, his resurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit to empower his disciples to preach the good news to all nations. The view encompasses the covenant principles given through Noah, Abraham, Moses, David and Jeremiah. All of this was through God's unmerited favour, his grace. This grace includes the aspects of Torah given to Moses in the wilderness years.

It is a mistake to think that grace began with the writing of the New Testament. The entire plan of God is through grace, and it is one coherent plan from start to finish."

Confusion has often arisen because of a misreading of John 1:17:

For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

Even if we insert the word Torah for law, taking this verse in isolation, we are still left with the same possibility of thinking that what Moses was given was replaced when Jesus came to earth. Yet, John 1:17 is preceded, in the same passage, by John 1:1-3:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

Jesus, the Son of God, was with the Father before Creation. All things came through him, including all of God's spoken and written word, and what Moses was shown. Moses was not the originator of God's grace: this was the higher call of God in Jesus, both pre-incarnate and incarnate. Moses, born of the flesh, was an agent of central aspects of God's Torah but he was less than Jesus. Yet it was grace that brought forth the Torah- as with all of God's goodness.

In his Gospel, John was comparing the ministry of Moses and Jesus more than comparing grace and law.² The main point that we are making here is that we must not bring a false contrast between grace and law when both are from God and linked together.

Ultimately, through all the strands of history and all the experiences of mankind in seeking to restore fellowship with the One True God, through grace God has been outworking a plan that all who can be saved will be saved. He has revealed to us what is good and made provision in Jesus for the shortcomings that the flesh cannot achieve by its own will.

Restoring balance

There have been nearly 2000 years of gradual separation of the Christian Church from its relationship with Israel and the Jews. Now we have a somewhat different task before us than was faced in the Council of Jerusalem of Acts 15. We need to look back at the root meaning of some of the terms used in the New Testament, such as grace and law, in the context of the continuous covenant plan of God from the Fall in Genesis to the Restoration envisioned in the Book of Revelation. We need to reconnect the Church into the seamless flow of covenant history through this restored balance.

The New Covenant brought a new and permanent sacrifice for sin. Trust in God through faith in Jesus' sacrifice brings forgiveness of sins that are by grace alone. Forgiveness of sins leads to desire for sanctification – a clean heart and a pleasing walk with God. The Holy Spirit interprets Torah at heart level. Study of all Scripture is to be understood in this context.

The challenge in all things is to give no place to the flesh and encourage one another on this walk, in the balance of all of God's teaching, into the life of faith through the grace of God.

We must not even seek to "work up faith" as some do in the areas of healing and deliverance, turning faith into works. Our goal is to encourage one another on a personal walk with God through prayer and study of the Bible, trusting the Holy Spirit to be our tutor on this walk together.

For Study and Prayer

This study is not a complete overview of this sensitive subject; rather, it should be a prompt for further study. Despite all we have written, the subject is yet deeper and wider, with many implications to consider. You may have realised that this topic requires something of a mindset reorientation, and this can take some time.

• Consider how recognition of the continuity of all Scripture influences the way we study key topics from the Bible.
• Can you discover other topics that begin in the early chapters of the Bible and develop right through from Genesis to Revelation?
• Do you agree that a separation of the Christian Church from its historical foundations has affected the way we study the Bible?

Next time: Jesus the Jewish Messiah

These studies are developed from the course Christianity's Relationship with Israel and the Jews, first prepared for Tishrei Bible School.

References

1 p26, Eerdmans, 1989.

2 There was also a possibility that John's use of the term 'Moses' stood symbolically for the interpretation of the teachers of Torah, of his day. This is how the teaching of Moses was passed on. It was interpreted by the teachers of the day as much as studied from the written word. Thus, 'Moses' can mean the current teaching and interpretation of the Books of Moses. Thereby there is an element of contrast between what had become the practices of Torah in Jesus' day and the grace through which he brought true emphasis to God's teaching.

Clifford Denton's latest study on the Hebraic roots of Christianity turns to the tricky subject of the balance between 'law' and 'grace'.

The rift between Jews and Christians

The broken relationship between Jews and Christians has had immense consequences. Misunderstanding has often fuelled the flames of hate and aggravated the harm that has been done to God's people. There have also been consequences for the way we read the Bible, particularly since Hebraic thinking has been replaced by a Greek mindset. This has detracted from the continuity between the two Testaments and has unbalanced perspectives through the centuries.

Among the Bible themes disjointed by the ascension of Greek thinking is the relationship between law and grace, now often separated in the thinking of many Christians. The common error nowadays (despite the way some Scriptures seem to read otherwise) is to consider 'law' as completely done away with in favour of 'grace', because of the sacrifice of Jesus."

However, if we read the New Testament with a thorough grasp of its continuity with the whole of Scripture, and put it in proper historical context, the subtle relationship between law and grace takes on a clearer perspective. It was through God's grace that all His teaching (the Torah) was given to us. All the law that was revealed through Moses came through the grace of God. There is much to consider on this topic, but that is a good starting point.

Is this Judaising?

This call to flee Greek thinking and return to the Hebraic roots of the Christian faith must not be construed as 'Judaising'. 'Judaising' is the word often used to accuse those who seem to be too caught up with all things Jewish (in contemporary usage, it often carries with it a hint of anti-Semitism). Those accused seem to be overly fascinated with external forms of Jewishness that come more from tradition than from conventional Christian interpretations of the Scriptures. They are also often thought of as having a faulty understanding of law and grace.

There is a difference between Judaising - becoming overly fascinated with external forms of Jewishness - and developing a right respect of God's laws."

Paul gave plentiful warning against Judaising activity to the Galatians (eg chapter 2). However, there is a difference between Judaising and developing a right respect of God's laws. Let us now consider the situation in the First Century when the Gospel message began to move out into the Gentile world.

From Moses to Jesus

The teaching of God (Torah), considered to be founded on the first five books of the Bible, has needed practical interpretation ever since the time of Moses. Torah remains a set of written principles until interpreted into action.

An important principle was established when Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, helped Moses understand how to teach the people the way to obey the principles of Torah:

You shall teach them the statutes and the laws and show them the way in which they must walk and the work they must do. Moreover you shall select from all the people able men, such as fear God......let them judge the people at all times. Then it will be that every great matter they shall bring to you, but every small matter they themselves shall judge. (Ex 18:20-22)

From that time onwards, the burden of teaching was shared by the elders of Israel, comparably to the way Scripture is taught today through the ministry of teaching in the Church.

The purpose of the teaching was so that every member of the Children of Israel - every family, clan and tribe, and the entire Nation - would know how to walk out the principles of Torah. The Hebrew for 'walking out' is halakha - a practical application of Torah according to the wisdom of God (walking is also the metaphor applied to the life of faith for the Christian - see Romans 8, where Paul explores the walk in the Spirit).

By the time of Jesus, the elders whom Moses had appointed in his day had been transformed into the members of the religious authority called the Sanhedrin. In addition, schools of Rabbis had formed with different shades of interpretation of Torah. However, whilst these different Rabbinic schools were zealous to interpret Torah accurately, their walking out of God's law had become more religious duty than personal relationship with him.

Every human being is prone to legalism, feeling more comfortable with rules than relationship."

This is the main point in understanding what the term 'law' meant in Paul's day and, indeed, what it means in Judaism today. The flesh of all human beings is prone to legalism, feeling more comfortable with rules than relationship. This can be so for Christians as well as Jews, and was the reason for Paul's warnings in the New Testament. At the time when Paul taught about law and grace, law was not so much Torah (the Old Testament teaching of God in its written form) as it was the interpretation of Torah into principles of living (indeed, 'halakha' in our own day is still the term used in Judaism for legal interpretations of Torah).

It is therefore reasonable for us to suppose that when Paul talked about law, he was referring to the teaching of the Rabbis, whose method of interpreting Torah imposed binding rules on their disciples rather than encouraging a personal walk with the God of Israel. This close relationship had been understood by their own Prophet Micah, when he wrote:

He has shown you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God. (Mic 6:8)

Torah and Halakhah correctly interpreted

Torah, the teaching of God brought through Moses, is subject to interpretation and application. It becomes the legalism against which we are warned when wrongly interpreted as obligations of the flesh, and sometimes even into rules made by men (Col 2:22).

God's law becomes legalism when it is wrongly interpreted as obligations of the flesh, rather than a living walk with him."

By contrast, the New Covenant was the means by which Almighty God sent his Spirit to us to write the Torah on our hearts (Jer 31:33) and mobilise our walk with him (halakha) in a new and living way. Understanding the subtlety of this helps us to rebalance our view of Paul's teaching and to reconsider the balance of law and grace in the whole of Scripture.

Law as a Protector

If the Law of God is considered to be replaced by the grace of God, this not only impacts individual understandings but so the stability of entire societies.

God's law works to protect and guide human beings who are not able to live by the inner workings of the Holy Spirit. Nations such as Britain, which have been impacted by the Gospel message over many centuries, have long been stabilized through biblical laws on their statute books. In Britain we can go back at least as far as King Alfred to trace the influence of biblical principles of law.

Consider this quotation from Sir Francis Palgrave's 'History of the Anglo Saxons'¹ (emphases added):

The third and chief principle which actuated Alfred, was his endeavour to impart the spirit of the law of God to the temporal legislation of his kingdom. Alfred's statutes are prefaced by the Decalogue, to which is added a selection from the Mosaic precepts, and the canons of the first Apostolic council. "Do these", he continues, "and if these commands be obeyed, no other doom-book will be required." We commonly say that Christianity is a part of the law of the land. Alfred had a clearer perception of the station which religion should possess in a Christian commonwealth. He would have wished to render Christianity the law itself. The necessity for any human law exists solely in proportion to our neglect of the Divine law; and if we were enabled to write the law on our hearts, nothing whatever would be left for human legislation to perform.

Do you see what the author had detected in a balanced understanding of law to be applied to a nation? It is instructive to note that Palgrave (1788 -1861) was born into a Jewish family and converted to Christianity, which adds special emphasis to this insight into the history of the British Nation, especially in the context of our study of law and grace.

For Study and Prayer

Consider the biblical principles of Torah and halakha in relation to what a Christian should understand by the word law.

Next time: We will continue to consider the balance of law and grace.

These studies are developed from the course Christianity's Relationship with Israel and the Jews, first prepared for Tishrei Bible School.

References

1 p114, The Collected Historical Works of Sir Francis Palgrave, Vol 5: The History of the Anglo-Saxons, 1921 [2013]. R. H. I Palgrave (Ed), Cambridge, CUP.