Month: March 2020

Passover in I Corinthians

Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians seems to have been written immediately before or after the biblical festival of Passover. He mentions it a number of times in addressing his readers.

One reason for thinking that Paul was writing at Passover time is the explicit time frame that he mentions in chapter 16. He expresses a desire to visit Corinth after going through Macedonia. But he is currently in Ephesus, and he says, “I will stay on at Ephesus until Pentecost…” (16:8). Pentecost, as you know, is the Greek term for the biblical festival of Shavuot, or Weeks, that comes fifty days after Passover.

There are also internal evidences that Paul had Passover on his mind when writing to the Corinthians. In chapter five he is discussing immorality within the congregation. He is comparing the sin with leaven/yeast in bread in that a little of it works its way through the whole batch, so they should get rid of the sin, like unleavened bread. “For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth.” (5:7-8)

Even though Paul is interpreting the Passover bread and yeast in a somewhat allegorical sense, it’s clear that he expects his readers (mostly Gentiles) to observe the Passover and learn lessons about life from its symbolism.

Paul goes even deeper into discussing Passover in chapter 11 when he criticizes their actions during a recent Passover seder. In the traditional seder, there is a lot of liturgy to go through before the meal is served, and Paul criticizes the impatience of some (perhaps Gentiles) who go ahead and start eating the food before the proper time in the ceremony. He clarifies that the purpose of celebrating Passover is not to eat (you can do that at home) but to commemorate the things God has done.

He then goes into a review of Christ’s last Passover seder with his disciples as recorded in the gospels. On this occasion, Christ gives no hint that he intends to initiate a new ceremony. Instead, he is celebrating Passover with his disciples in the biblically prescribed manner. There is a lot of symbolism in the events of the seder that recall the deliverance from Egypt. Jesus is telling his disciples to apply this same symbolism to his passion and death which delivers from sin.

Jesus has already been compared to the Passover lamb by John at his baptism. (John 1:29) Now he compares himself to the Passover matzah, the unleavened bread. In the same way that the matzah is ceremonially broken at the seder, Jesus’ body is broken in death.

He uses the third cup (out of four), the cup of Redemption, to signify his blood to be shed on the cross to bring redemption from sin. As the blood of the lamb was spread on the doorpost of the house in Egypt so that God would not exact punishment on that household, so the shed blood of Jesus tells God to spare the believer from the punishment for sin that Jesus took, inaugurating the new covenant that is foreseen in Jeremiah 31.

Jesus then went on to instruct his disciples to continue to observe Passover until his return, but when they did it, to apply the symbolism to his suffering and death as well as to the deliverance from Egypt. “For whenever you eat this bread (the Passover matzah) and drink this cup (the third cup of Passover), you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.” (I Cor. 11:26)

It’s a shame that so many followers of Jesus have misapplied this passage to create a new ceremony that has no biblical warrant at all, and to dilute it by performing it monthly, weekly, or daily. Many of these same people ignore Passover entirely, and substitute other, man-made holidays for the ones God ordained.

It wasn’t an accident that the passion of Jesus took place during the Passover season; it was God’s perfect timing. And Paul urges his readers, Gentiles as well as Jews, to celebrate the Passover in commemoration of God’s gracious deliverance, both from Egypt, and its analog, the redemption of Christ on the cross.

The Tension Between Law and Faith

In the third chapter of Romans Paul focuses on a natural tension that arises. He has been talking about demonstrating righteousness by keeping the law rather than merely hearing it. Some people might conclude from this that you become righteous by keeping the law. So he devotes chapter three to a discussion of this tension.

He starts out by pointing out the advantage of the Jew in having been exposed to God’s words and commands. But even some of them did not have faith, the circumcision of the heart that we talked about last week. He goes on to declare that no one is righteous in himself, whether Jew or Gentile; all are under sin.

He then goes on to discuss the righteousness that comes through faith in Jesus, apart from merely keeping the law. He explains how Jesus had to die to fulfill the demand for justice, since he wasn’t punishing the sinners themselves.

A phrase that Paul uses several times in this passage (as well as others) is “works of law” (ergon nomou). It is not “works of the law”, but just “works of law”. Some treat it as if it means observing the law of God given in the Hebrew Scriptures. The phrase is not used in rabbinic literature, but it is found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. There it appears to refer to specific actions that mark one as Jewish rather than Gentile. In light of this Paul seems to be making the point that a person is not righteous simply because he’s a Jew. He’s not discussing the merits of keeping the law.

In verses 27 and 28 Paul uses the phrase twice, to argue against boasting, and to contrast with justification by faith. In the next verse, however, he appears to draw a parallel by asking, “Is God the God of Jews only” Is he not the God of Gentiles too?” So in light of the meaning of the phrase “works of law” in the Dead Sea Scrolls, it appears that Paul’s main argument boils down to “you aren’t saved just by being a Jew”.

In verse 30 he points out that God justifies the Jew and the Gentile in the same way, through faith. Jews or Gentiles who embrace God through the death of Jesus have this righteousness.

But having emphasized that salvation, for anyone, is through faith, Paul makes a special point of correcting a misconception that has since become prevalent among believers. He says, “Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Absolutely not! Rather, we uphold the law!” This is Paul’s last word on the subject, and it never seems to get quoted when discussing Paul’s position on the law.

Interestingly, Paul makes a similar statement in I Corinthians 7:19. Paraphrased, it would say, “It doesn’t matter if you’re a Jew or a Gentile. Keep God’s commands!” Again, this isn’t for the purpose of obtaining salvation, but out of love for God. As John says in I John 5:3, “This is love for God, to obey his commands.” It’s hard to imagine that so many people are convinced that the New Testament teaches against keeping God’s law.

The Law in Romans

We’ve seen in some past posts how Paul viewed God’s law in the book of Acts and how he even went out of his way to provide evidence to quell the rumor that he was teaching people to disregard the law. (Acts 21) But what about his epistles? Do they claim that the law is no longer in effect, as some people think? Let’s look at his epistle to the Romans and see what it says about this topic.

We should first notice that Paul declares the primacy of Jews over Gentiles in the faith of Jesus. He says that the gospel “is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile” (1:16). In chapter three he states that Jews have much advantage over Gentiles because “they have been entrusted with the very words of God” (3:1-2).

Back in chapter two he addresses Jews and their association with the law. He says, “You who brag about the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law?” (2:23) It’s clear that he thinks that Jews who adhere to God and his law should keep it so as not to dishonor God. But should the law be kept by Jews only?

He goes on to say, “If those who are not circumcised (i.e. Gentiles) keep the law’s requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker” (2:26-27). It’s clear that he considers Gentiles keeping the law as a good thing.

Earlier in chapter two he addresses the difference between hearing the law and obeying it. “For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous” (2:13). He doesn’t mean by this that keeping the law brings salvation, as he makes clear in 3:20. But keeping the law is a way of declaring that you are righteous, that you have been saved.

Admittedly he’s talking primarily to Jews at this point and contrasting those who talk about the law with those who actually keep it. But he does go on to include Gentiles in the conversation when he speaks favorably that “Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law… they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts” (2:14-15).

What’s this about having the requirements of the law written on the heart? The idea echoes the language of Jeremiah when he announced the coming of the new covenant (for Jews only) with God saying, “I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts” (Jeremiah 31:33).

Paul uses slightly different language for the same concept at the end of Romans 2. “A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly, and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man’s praise is not from men, but from God.” (2:28-29). Circumcision of the heart is something that had been urged since Moses (cp. Deuteronomy 10:16; 30:6). And here Paul declares that it’s available to Gentiles as well.

Elsewhere in his epistles Paul talks about believing Gentiles being included in Israel in different terms: being grafted into the olive tree (Romans 11:17-24), becoming one new man, or a building in which God lives (Ephesians 2:11-22). But it’s clear that when Gentiles accept Jesus’ sacrifice and embrace the God and the people of Israel, they are considered to be a part of the greater Israel, due to their heart condition — circumcision of the heart.

Paul summarizes this in chapter 3 when he talks about the mystery that was revealed to him. “This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise of Christ Jesus” (3:6). He goes on to explain how this mystery of Gentile believers becoming one with Israel is to demonstrate the wisdom of God to the entire spiritual world. Praise God for his wisdom!

Peter on Paul

It is well known that when Jesus and the apostles lived and taught, the only Scripture that they had was the Hebrew Bible, sometimes called the Old Testament. This Hebrew Bible was affirmed by Jesus many times, for example, when he said, “the Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35). It was also affirmed by other apostles in their letters, for example when Paul wrote, “All Scripture is God-breathed” (II Timothy 3:16).

These words testify to the scriptural status of the Hebrew Bible. But is there anything that testifies similarly for the New Testament? Since the New Testament was not assembled into a collection until many years after it was written, we wouldn’t expect it to testify to itself. But there is a place in II Peter that appears to do so.

Peter’s second letter is thought by many to have been written by someone other than Peter. But one of the points he makes early is that he’s not making up the things he said about Jesus; he’s an eye witness. If he’s writing pretending to be someone he’s not, this testimony wouldn’t have much credibility. But as Peter, he certainly has standing to tell us what Jesus taught.

But he also seems to affirm Paul’s writings as Scripture. In the third chapter he writes, “Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.” (3:15-16) By comparing Paul’s letters to “the other Scriptures”, he affirms the scriptural status of Paul’s writings.

In discussing Paul’s letters, his main point is that they contain some things that are hard to understand, and that some people distort them through misunderstanding. Does Peter give any hint of how people misunderstand and distort Paul’s letters? Actually, he does.

He follows up the previous verse by warning his readers to “be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position” (3:17). So misunderstanding Paul can lead to “the error of lawless men”.

We have seen how this has played out in the history of the church. Despite clear and emphatic statements by both Jesus (Matthew 5:17-19) and Paul (Romans 3:31) about the continuing validity of God’s law, the bulk of the church took an anti-Jewish and anti-Torah turn in the second century, and has been insisting ever since that God’s law is obsolete. They justify this stance by citing some passages from Paul’s letters that may seem to teach such a thing on the surface, but on closer examination are often teaching that keeping the law does not save a person.

We will be looking at some of these passages in future posts, as well as passages where Paul affirms the law. But it’s easy to see how prophetic Peter was when he warned people to avoid distorting Paul’s letters and falling into the error of lawless men. That’s exactly what happened, and we’re still suffering the consequences.