The Law: Was it so Hard

[liamconnor]

Protestant branches of Christianity present ancient Judaism as an impossible religion in which members are always in despair because they can never obey the law. Out of this assessment arises the value of Christianity: The Jewish Law is impossible to fulfill; but good news, one does not have to fulfill it!

Question: Is the Jewish Law really that hard? I have read the O.T. several times. I have read much of Rabbinic Law. None of it seems terribly hard.

[imhereforyou]

It's easy, today, to say 'no the law wasn't hard' without living it (armchair quarterbacking in a sense). Times were different then so maybe it wasn't as hard as people think it is today. Or maybe it was freakin' hard and almost no one could do it.
Hindsight is always 20/20 - best you can get from anyone who didn't live it was an opinion, which may, or may not, fulfill your needs (?).

Apart from the sacrifices, which can not be done today, there are hundreds of thousands who live it now. One of the things that appears to be missing in this discussion is the fact that there are three, or possibly four, levels of observance. There is observance for salvation, which is generally what Paul is talking about. That is not possible. There is observance as halacha(lifestyle). That is possible. Then there is observance as ritual, which could have been difficult and still is, even without the sacrifice. In addition there is observance using fences, additions to assure that one does not cross the line. Yeshua was concerned about this last one. He was for fences of conscience and not codified fences. So, when one is reading the Scriptures one must be aware of these levels of observance and how the interact. The letter the the Galatians is probably the best example of this. Much of the contention over how to interpret it stems from the fact that Paul is dealing with all four of these concepts in one letter, so it easy to make a mistake with regard to which one he happens to be referring to, if one does not pay close attention.

Hundreds of thousands still doesn't mean it's not difficult (or easy for that matter). But considering the % of the entire population, a 'hundred of thousands' isn't much impressive and still doesn't negate the arm chair quarterbacking in which many participate.

The concept of multiple levels of observance strikes me as annoying and utterly unnecessary for simple salvation (if that's its intent).

Why such strict laws and observances need to be required from God? He can speak life into existence but people have to do this and that to please him? Highly suspect as far as I can see.
But I imagine many cult rituals are like that for.....fun?

[Elijah John]

It's easy, today, to say 'no the law wasn't hard' without living it (armchair quarterbacking in a sense). Times were different then so maybe it wasn't as hard as people think it is today. Or maybe it was freakin' hard and almost no one could do it.
Hindsight is always 20/20 - best you can get from anyone who didn't live it was an opinion, which may, or may not, fulfill your needs (?).

Apart from the sacrifices, which can not be done today, there are hundreds of thousands who live it now. One of the things that appears to be missing in this discussion is the fact that there are three, or possibly four, levels of observance. There is observance for salvation, which is generally what Paul is talking about. That is not possible. There is observance as halacha(lifestyle). That is possible. Then there is observance as ritual, which could have been difficult and still is, even without the sacrifice. In addition there is observance using fences, additions to assure that one does not cross the line. Yeshua was concerned about this last one. He was for fences of conscience and not codified fences. So, when one is reading the Scriptures one must be aware of these levels of observance and how the interact. The letter the the Galatians is probably the best example of this. Much of the contention over how to interpret it stems from the fact that Paul is dealing with all four of these concepts in one letter, so it easy to make a mistake with regard to which one he happens to be referring to, if one does not pay close attention.

You make many good and interesting points regarding the various levels of observance. But the level for salvation, "not possible"??

Where did Moses, (who transmitted the Law) ever explain that is the case?

The whole impossibility thing is Paul's baby, and foreign to the Torah.

Why give the Law expecting it to be kept, yet never explaining that it was futile to attempt to keep it?

Where did Moses or any of the Prophets ever explain that the Law is procecutorial only, and for the sole purpose of illustrating our "need for a Savior"?

Seems it is Paul vs. Moses, King David, Jesus and the Prophets. Paul has seriously deviated from the teachings of the Torah, and from the teachings of his own (Hebrew) Bible.

[Monta]

[Replying to post 14 by liamconnor]



"There is no evidence from the Law or Jewish literature that the Law was impossible to follow."

In that case we should have lots of evidence that the law was kept.

We are told Elijah was taken up to heaven that implies that he led a holy life.

There are many references in OT where God reprimands Jews for their sins,
for doing evil and pleads with them to repent.

[showme]

Protestant branches of Christianity present ancient Judaism as an impossible religion in which members are always in despair because they can never obey the law. Out of this assessment arises the value of Christianity: The Jewish Law is impossible to fulfill; but good news, one does not have to fulfill it!

Question: Is the Jewish Law really that hard? I have read the O.T. several times. I have read much of Rabbinic Law. None of it seems terribly hard.

What is hard, is to enter into the "kingdom of heaven". For one must be more righteous than the Pharisees to enter. (Mt 5:20) The Pharisees simply have to not commit adultery, but those who enter into the kingdom, are not able to look "on a woman to lust for her" (Mt 5:28). Unless one dies to self, reconstitute a new wine skin, and is reborn, they would not even be able to be a sanctuary to the Spirit of God. On the other hand, those who follow the false prophet, think they can ignore the Laws of God all together, for they apparently have been "released from the Law" (Romans 7:6).

[bluethread]

You make many good and interesting points regarding the various levels of observance. But the level for salvation, "not possible"??

Yom Kippur has historically been a time of uncertainty and dependent on Adonai's acceptance of the sacrifice. That and all of the other sacrifices were a means of restoring fellowship. However, acceptance was based on The Promise, not the keeping of HaTorah. We know this because Avraham was declared righteous apart from HaTorah.

Where did Moses, (who transmitted the Law) ever explain that is the case?

The whole impossibility thing is Paul's baby, and foreign to the Torah.

I do not know of where Moshe' ever spoke of salvation. He documented the events prior to Israel entering the land and he also documented the stipulations of the Covenant. That is why there were some who did not believe in the resurrection. It is not just Paul, but the entire shul of the Pharisees that propogated the idea of the resurrection. Some held that it was obtained through the keeping of HaTorah. However, that is not directly stated in HaTorah. All teaching regarding the afterlife is rabbinic teaching.

Why give the Law expecting it to be kept, yet never explaining that it was futile to attempt to keep it?

Even without eternal life, it is not futile. It is The Covenant between Adonai and His people that governs there lives here on earth.

Where did Moses or any of the Prophets ever explain that the Law is procecutorial only, and for the sole purpose of illustrating our "need for a Savior"?

That is my point. Apart from the redemption from the bondage is Egypt, which made those delivered Adonai's subjects. I do not know of any "salvation" spoken of in HaTorah. That is a pharisitcal rabbinic teaching.

Seems it is Paul vs. Moses, King David, Jesus and the Prophets. Paul has seriously deviated from the teachings of the Torah, and from the teachings of his own (Hebrew) Bible.

I would not say that the shul of the Pharisees, including Yeshua, deviated from HaTorah on that point. They provided one of many explanations that Ha Torah does not directly state regarding the afterlife.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 25 by bluethread]

How then, do you reconcile all that with Jesus own admonition that

"if you would enter life, keep the commandments".

( Mt 19.17)

The subject was the inheritance of eternal life.

Nothing about believing in any atoning merits of "believing in" Jesus' impending martyrdom. Rather just "keep the commandments".

Seems Jesus saw equivlency between eternal life, to the life and deliverance spoken of in his own Hebrew Bible. Both were "salvation".

Then there's the parable from Luke about the Rich Man and Lazarus.

"if they do not listen to Moses (Law) and the Prophets, neither would they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead"

Ironic, considering who's telling the parable.

So here too, Jesus is teaching that keeping the Law will lead to eternal life. He never spoke against the Law, or diminished it's importance by teaching that it's utility was ony for the purpose of making us aware of our sinfulness, (as Paul does). Rather, Jesus called people to keep the Law from the heart. To observe the Spirit of the Law, not just the letter.

Yes, no one keeps it perfectly, but when we deviate, there's always repentance, and trust in the mercy of the Father., Jesus taught the Father's mercy with no mention of blood in the Lord's Prayer, the Parables and the Beattitudes.

Seems Jesus was more of an enlightened Jew than he was a Pauline Christian. In this, he was very much in the tradition of such prophets as Micah, (6.6-8) and others. And like all of his predecessors, Jesus called his people to repentance, and a deeper observance of the Torah..

See also, Luke 10.25.

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 26 by Elijah John]

Surely you don't read Matthew 19:17 so literally?

You actually took the whole passage out of context. Jesus is specifically using it to imply that no one can be saved.

25 When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?�

26 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.�

Read it as if the young man is not sincere and already keeps the law, so Jesus throws that back at him. But the young man knows it isn't enough and so does Jesus.

The young man knows it isn't enough:

20 “All these I have kept,� the young man said. “What do I still lack?�

The passage from Matthew 19 16-30 is as anti-law as it gets.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 27 by Wootah]

Luke 10.25-28

25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,� he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?�
26 “What is written in the Law?� he replied. “How do you read it?�
27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[a]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’�
28 “You have answered correctly,� Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.�

Do you consider this "anti-law" too?

Also, in your post you did not address the fact that Abraham (in the parable of Jesus) speaks from Heaven and clearly tells the tormented soul that the brothers have "Moses and the Prophets", read "the Law and the Prophets" and that is enough to guide one to Heaven. A risen person, according to the parable, would be superflulous when we already have Moses and the Prophets.

Jesus taught this!

[dakoski]

[Replying to Elijah John]

You make many good and interesting points regarding the various levels of observance. But the level for salvation, "not possible"??

Where did Moses, (who transmitted the Law) ever explain that is the case?

The whole impossibility thing is Paul's baby, and foreign to the Torah.

Why give the Law expecting it to be kept, yet never explaining that it was futile to attempt to keep it?

Where did Moses or any of the Prophets ever explain that the Law is procecutorial only, and for the sole purpose of illustrating our "need for a Savior"?

Seems it is Paul vs. Moses, King David, Jesus and the Prophets. Paul has seriously deviated from the teachings of the Torah, and from the teachings of his own (Hebrew) Bible.

Throughout the Bible it speaks of no-one being righteous by their own merits:

Psalm 14:1-3:
The Lord looks down from heaven
on all mankind
to see if there are any who understand,
any who seek God.
All have turned away, all have become corrupt;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.

Ecclesiastes 7:20
Indeed, there is no one on earth who is righteous,
no one who does what is right and never sins.

Psalm 130:3-4
If you, Lord, kept a record of sins,
Lord, who could stand?
But with you there is forgiveness,
so that we can, with reverence, serve you

Isaiah 64:6
All of us have become like one who is unclean,
and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags;
we all shrivel up like a leaf,
and like the wind our sins sweep us away

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 27 by Wootah]

Luke 10.25-28

25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,� he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?�
26 “What is written in the Law?� he replied. “How do you read it?�
27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[a]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’�
28 “You have answered correctly,� Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.�

Do you consider this "anti-law" too?

Also, in your post you did not address the fact that Abraham (in the parable of Jesus) speaks from Heaven and clearly tells the tormented soul that the brothers have "Moses and the Prophets", read "the Law and the Prophets" and that is enough to guide one to Heaven. A risen person, according to the parable, would be superflulous when we already have Moses and the Prophets.

Jesus taught this!

The other passage is specifically about a young man asking what can he do for eternal life and Jesus says be perfect and even the disciples realise how futile that is. But Jesus claims nothing is impossible for him (which is another claim to he God btw).

Do you see that now?

You can also in this passagre from Luke start with the person asking the question. They are trying to trap Jesus. So Jesus says follow the law (as you and I agree) but he never leaves it there EJ. Why is that?

(A: because it is not enough.)

Jesus in both passages you quoted is specifically trying to get you past the law which it seems like many on this forum think than can fulfil. Ok be honest did you do what Jesus said to the young man l? Did you do what he said to the pharisee?

If not then you arent even fulfilling the law