In my youth I heard an orthodox rabbi tell the story of a man carrying
a heavy bundle. People felt sorry for him until they saw that his bundle
was full of sparkling diamonds. So it is, he taught, with the Jew who is
"burdened" with the "bundle" of the divine commandments. This positive
view of the Laws, the Law as a blessing, is also the heritage of
Commandment-keeping Christianity. Regarding personal conduct and
cultic community observance, practices can be maintained that do not
require the backing of civil authority. In these areas Commandment Keepers
view the biblical commandments as something positive. The presumption is
that they should apply unless there is a valid, biblically acceptable
reason why they should not. There is, of course, the belief that the New
Covenant differs from the Old. However, living under the conditions of the
New Covenant is not looked upon as implying hostility to the ancient
commandments. There is a change in emphasis and approach but not a
complete rejection of the content of the laws involving personal and
cultic conduct:
It is the function of the Church'as the spiritual MOTHER of
Christians in it'to develop holy, righteous and perfect godly CHARACTER
in those God has called'those God has added to the Church. (Armstrong
1985, 265)
The difference with some elements in the more orthodox
churches is not so great. Some of them also pay close attention to many
Old Testament precepts. The difference involves what change actually took
place with the coming of the New Testament Church. Although a Christian is
not under the authority of the old written code, there are obviously
elements of it that are permanent.
Bible-believing Christians should be able to concur that the New
Testament clarifies what is still in force but does not repeat explicitly
every rule that is still in force. For example, Leviticus 18 contains
prohibitions against various incestuous relationships. These are generally
not repeated in the New Testament, but I Corinthians five implies that
they are still required. See for example verses one to two and verses nine
through eleven:
It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among
you, and of a kind that is not found even among the pagans; for a man is
living with his father's wife.
And you are arrogant! Should you not rather have mourned,
so that he who has done this would have been removed from among you?. .
. .I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral
persons.
Not at all meaning the immoral of this world, or the greedy
and robbers, or idolaters, since you would then need to go out of the
world.
But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone
who bears the name of brother or sister who is sexually immoral or
greedy, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber. Do not even eat
with such a one (I Corinthians 5:1-2, 9-11).
Commandment Keepers would argue that the Sabbath and annual
Festivals commanded in the Pentateuch are also still in force. The New
Testament implies that the early Church observed them. The same is
believed of certain other commandments, such as the Old Testament dietary
laws, generally discarded in Catholicism and Protestantism. The approach
also differs from Seventh Day Adventism which permits and even encourages
the observance of certain mainstream holidays such as Christmas and Easter
while generally ignoring the annual observances commanded in the
Pentateuch. Moreover, many Adventists observe certain strictures that are
extra-biblical, such as vegetarianism. The sectarians that are the subject
of this dissertation make an effort to limit severely the role of
tradition or the authority of post-biblical authors. The ideal is sola
scriptura for doctrine with the understanding that both Testaments are
included.
Traditional Christian exegetes have taught that a moral code has
consistently existed and is contained in both the Old and New Testaments.
Matters of a ceremonial nature, not explicitly connected with personal
morality, have not been considered binding on Christians. We have seen
that Thomas Aquinas, writing in the thirteenth century, condemned such
observances by Christians. The issue becomes more challenging for
Christian theologians regarding Sabbath observance, since it is included
in that basic moral code, the Decalogue.
Chapters Three and Four included material concerning the
traditional approach taken by mainstream Christianity to the Sabbath
commandment of the Decalogue. The historical response has been to teach
that the principle that one day in seven should be a day of worship has
continuing validity. The specific day is generally considered to be a
ceremonial matter, not a binding rule of conduct over the centuries.
Church tradition is appealed to as the source of authority for placing a
special significance on Sunday.
A few scriptures are often cited to support Sunday observance,
but even some noteworthy supporters of Sunday worship admit that those
scriptures themselves are inconclusive. Even the resting from labor aspect
of the Sabbath is de-emphasized as a foreshadowing of the spiritual rest
of the followers of Jesus Christ (Bacchiocchi 1997, 294-295). Regarding
Sabbath observance, a booklet published in 1996 by the United Church of
God states:
Although the concept of rest has largely disappeared, most
denominations continue to hold their worship services on Sunday. You can
search throughout the Bible, but you will find no authority to alter the
day of worship. (Ashley 1966, 10)
In the dictionary of Religion and Philosophy by Geddes
MacGregor, the following information is included in the entry entitled,
"Tithes":
The payment to the Church of a tenth of one's income or the produce
of one's land is very ancient, e.g., in England it was enjoined in the
8th c. And became law in 900. In modern times the payments of tithes by
individuals and families to the Church is practiced by some Christian
denominations and encouraged in most throughout the world. (616)
Many contemporary Commandment-keeping Christian sects strongly support
the practice of tithing:
It is also important to note that, even though God temporarily gave
the tithe to the Levites for their service, it remained holy and
ultimately belonged to Him (Leviticus 27:30). When God gave it to the
Levites and the people refused to pay it to them, God said the people
were robbing Him'not robbing the Levites (Malachi 3:8). Christians, who
are under the New Covenant, continue to honor God through their tithes
and offerings. (United Church of God 1999, E9)
The belief of the old Worldwide Church of God was that the
tithing system was utilized to support the Old Covenant theocracy, but
that the principle of tithing transcends that temporal system. The
Worldwide Church of God originally published a seminal article on the
subject, widely circulated, in the Good News magazine in July,
1959. The article points out that the biblical testimony regarding the
practice places its origin explicitly in patriarchal times before the
codified Torah. "Tithing is not an invention of Moses. Tithing preceded
Moses. Moses did not dream up the idea" (Hoeh 1959, 2).
The article gives an explanation of the seventh chapter of the
Book of Hebrews which interprets the instruction there as demonstrating to
Christians that the tithes that had been utilized in Old Testament times
for the support of the Levitical system had in New Testament times been
transferred to support the Christian ministry. The passage in Hebrews
utilizes the account of Abraham, great grandfather of Levi, paying tithes
to a priest of unknown origin, Melchisedec (Hebrews 7:1).
Though the Levites received tithes of the people, yet through Abraham
the Levites indirectly paid tithes to Melchisedec also. Christ today is
high-priest, with the rank of Melchisedec. Therefore, if even those who
died [the Levites] received tithes, how much more should the One who
lives receive tithes? (Hoeh 1959, 1). [The brackets and the words within
are from the original citation.]
In 1993, the Worldwide Church of God published a volume
expounding on the Pentateuch. It was intended to be the first volume of a
series entitled, Exploring the Word of God. I was a collaborator on
the project. The booklet included a page entitled, "Tithing in Israel" (Shoaf
1993, 70). The following statement was included: "Abraham has been called
the 'father of the faithful.' Tithing, from the perspective of imitating
the faith and obedience of Abraham, is a Christian practice . . ." (70).
In the collection of twenty statements considered to be
Fundamental Beliefs of the United Church of God, an International
Association, the eighteenth statement preserves in codified form, the
heritage of tithing:
We believe in tithing as a way of honoring God with our substance and
as a means of serving Him in the preaching of the gospel, the care of
the Church, attending the festivals and helping the needy (Proverbs
3:9-10; Genesis 14:17-20; 1 Corinthians 9:7-14; Numbers 18:21;
Deuteronomy 14:22-29 (42).
This statement actually implies a commitment to follow the ancient
practice of saving a tithe for the purpose of celebrating the annual
festivals, and, where no public welfare system exists, of saving an
additional tithe in the third and sixth year of a seven-year cycle for
charitable purposes.
Each year many members of modern society spend money on holiday
celebrations such as Christmas and personal vacations. Members of United
Church of God, an International Association (UCGIA) and like-minded sects
direct much of that type of spending to the festivals of the Torah,
particularly the eight days associated with Sukkoth, the Feast of Booths,
also called the Feast of Tabernacles. Each year, in the autumn, many
thousand members of various Church of God fellowships travel to
pre-designated festival sites for worship, instruction and recreation.
Earlier in this century, the Worldwide Church of God was the most
prominent organization attempting to recapture the beliefs and practices
of the original Jerusalem church. The most effective material relating to
the role of the Old Testament in Christian practice is contained in
articles written by Herman L. Hoeh, a leading writer and spokesperson for
the Worldwide Church of God for more than four decades.
For many years, the Worldwide Church of God disseminated its
theology through a publication called The Good News. The
publication has not been published since 1990, but, since the title is not
copyrighted, The United Church of God, an International Association, as
has already been stated, is now publishing its own Good News
magazine. A key starting point for the United Church of God in evaluating
the role of the Torah for Christians can be seen in this excerpt from
Hoeh's article, "Which Laws in the Old Testament Have Authority Today?"
published in the old Good News in late 1983:
Jesus said: "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the
Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill" (Matt. 5:17).
God's Church believes David. It believes Jesus. It does
what He commands. He is, after all, the Head of the Church of God. (Hoeh
1983, 11)
There are several Hebrew scriptures that imply that laws of
God were known and observed by Abraham and that his descendants were, at
Sinai, being taught, not an entirely new way of life, but a way of life
similar to one that the Hebrews had neglected or forgotten.
As these statues and laws existed before the covenant made at Sinai,
they were not thereby abolished in A.D. 31 at the death of Christ. The
Old Covenant could not destroy what it did not bring into force. (Hoeh,
1983, 11)
Of course, a student of the civil laws of the Old Testament
would encounter rules that involve details that would seem quite specific
to the ancient Middle East. Here is the Christian approach to Old
Testament civil laws, according to Hoeh:
The civil law of Moses expounds the Ten Commandments by revealing how
the 10 basic principles are to be applied. We are to keep this part of
the law, not in the old strictness of the letter, but according to its
full spirit and intent (Hoeh 1983, 13, 19).
According to Hoeh in his article, "Which Old Testament Laws Should We
Keep Today?" written in 1971, "Only the ceremonial customs of the law of
Moses have passed away" (3).
The ceremonial laws were temporary:
Notice that these temporary laws did not define sin. They were
reminders of sin. God's spiritual laws define sin. The laws which define
sin -- which explain what sin is--these laws we are to keep today. (Hoeh
1971, 2)
The perspective on the Decalogue is similar to Aquinas', that
the Ten Commandments were valid from the creation of human beings:
In general the Ten Commandments apply to individual conduct, the
statutes to national or Church affairs and the judgments to decisions
rendered according to the principles of the Ten Commandments and the
statutes. (Hoeh 1983, 11)
Ancient Yahwists held to this position as can be inferred from Genesis
26:5: "because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my
commandments, my statutes, and my laws."
An example of how the approach of the Commandment Keepers to the
Pentateuch would differ from mainstream Christianity can be found in its
approach to the law of sha'atnez of Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy
22:11. In Leviticus 19:19, Israelites were commanded among various
prohibitions involving mixtures, " . . . nor shall you put on a garment
made of two different materials." The Deuteronomic code states, "You shall
not wear clothes made of wool and linen woven together." Although this
prohibition is important in Orthodox Judaism, I have no evidence that it
has much influence on mainstream Christian practice.
In contrast to the majority of professing Christians, Commandment
Keepers can be expected to go to the trouble of analyzing the verse
carefully to determine how to apply it today and then to encourage its
observance. Before abandoning Old Testament practices, the Worldwide
Church of God circulated the following instructions:
There are two basic kinds of natural fibers from which today's
garments are made. The first is plant cellulose fiber. Fabrics such as
linen and cotton are produced from it. The second is animal protein
fiber. Materials such as wool and silk are in this category. Because
these two basics kinds of fibers differ markedly in strength,
washability, absorption, and so forth, they should not be mixed.
(Worldwide Church of God n.d., Letter 125, 1)
Regarding the law against mixed fabrics derived from
Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:11, the church's publication stated:
Today we would call this a "consumer protection law." Notice that
these verses contain the basic principle that materials of widely
differing character and texture are not to be combined. On the other
hand, these verses do allow a number of combinations which are within
God's laws. (Worldwide Church of God n.d., Letter 125, 1)
Some Christians might include the law of "mixed fabrics" as
ceremonial and thus in the same category as the sacrifices. However, the
hermeneutic of the Commandment Keepers assumes a practical value to Old
Testament legislation unless there is a clear indication that the law is
strictly disciplinary or ceremonial in nature. It can be defensibly argued
that the issue under discussion involves the quality of one's garments and
is a matter of character and appropriate use of natural resources. The law
involves personal grooming, economy, and ecology. The Commandment Keepers
can be expected to encourage adherence to what they understand the law to
be demanding.
Further clarification must be added lest the reader
misunderstand. The law under discussion has never been a major issue in
the Worldwide Church of God community in the sense of the exercising of
any efforts to enforce compliance. Violation of it would not be viewed in
the same light as, for example, drunkenness, outright thievery, or
unethical business practices. In fact, as already shown, the church's
approach to this law is that it is prohibiting an unethical business
practice. The official letter on the subject used to state:
It should be noted that such combinations produce a cheaper
garment, with respect to quality, than one made with the best
grades of pure fibers. On the other hand, a fabric made from low-grade,
natural fibers is usually improved by the addition of compatible
man-made fibers. Any good tailor or seamstress knows that the best
quality clothing is made from 100 percent wool, cotton, and so forth.
Nevertheless, one need not throw away or destroy clothing which may be
of lower quality or a wrong mixture. Wearing such materials is not
a sin in itself. Rather, God does not want manufacturers producing
shoddy materials in order to take advantage of their customers.
(Worldwide Church of God n.d., Letter 125, 2)
In other words, the weavers should do the best job that they
can regarding the obtaining of appropriate garments without worry or
fanaticism:
A wise principle to follow in selecting either a pure or mixed
garment is to purchase the best quality one can afford for one's
family or oneself. God is honored by what we wear. But it is not wise to
go deeply into debt buying better quality than one can afford.
(Worldwide Church of God n.d, Letter 125, 2)
This utilitarian approach to the observance of Old Testament
regulations is the heritage of the sectarian churches of God. Their
members assume some practical, non-mystical value to Pentateuchal
regulations involving food, clothing, and sexual activity. The burden of
proof is on the interpreter who would argue for discounting the specific,
physical application of each law. The laws are interpreted in the least
oppressive fashion possible. This approach flows from the assumption that
the laws are eternally valid and are intended to bring discernible
benefits in the physical lives of those persons who obey them.
Such an approach can be seen in how the Sabbath is observed by
most Commandment Keepers. For that specific religious observance, there
are New Testament precedents for backing away from the extremes found in
Orthodox Judaism. Generally speaking, Commandment Keepers in their
observance of the weekly Sabbath might be described as closer to the ideal
approach of Conservative Judaism rather than that of Orthodox Judaism. The
same moderate standard would apply in the Christian observance of the
annual Holy Days of the Old Covenant.
In the August 28, 1995, edition of New Beginnings, the
title at that time for the official UCGIA newsletter, the pastor of their
Chilean members, Mario Seiglie, submitted an article entitled, "Why I Keep
the Sabbath, Holy Days, Tithing, and Food Laws." Seiglie writes that:
The primary reasons why I keep the Sabbath, Holy Days, tithing and
the biblical food laws are based not so much on biblical arguments
as on biblical examples. In a court of law, it is the evidence of
the witnesses, not of the theorists, which truly counts. (Seiglie 1995,
10) [italics his]
Commandment-keeping, sectarian Christians are aware that
Jesus violated rabbinic law regarding the Sabbath, but that he did not
violate biblical law. Mario Seiglie reminds his readers that:
There are no examples of godly men or women who broke the Sabbath.
There is a compelling lack of evidence to support such a sweeping
change of one of the fundamental commandments of God. (Seiglie 1995, 11)
Regarding the annual festivals listed in the twenty-third
chapter of Leviticus, Seiglie states:
The Holy Days were observed by all the men and women of God from the
prophets, to Christ, to the apostles and the New Testament Church. The
book of Acts is filled with such examples for Christians . . . .
The Biblical calendar, with its Holy Days, was the norm
throughout the Scriptures. History records that it was not until the
second century A.D. that the controversial practice of observing pagan
holidays became widespread. In many instances, pagan days were observed
alongside the Sabbaths of God; then the pagan celebrations completely
replaced them. (Seiglie 1995, 11)
Utilizing patriarchal example to interpret the Pentateuchal
tithing laws, the United Church of God teaches that the Old Testament
expected a minimum of ten percent of one's income to be donated to
ecclesiastical authorities (11).
According to Seiglie:
In at least one instance Paul chose not to accept tithes or offerings
from a group of recently converted gentiles. He wanted to avoid
offending local sensitivities about conversions for selfish monetary
gain. However, he did make it clear he had the power or right to
do so according to God's law. (I Corinthians 9:12). If tithing were
abolished and the giving of funds were purely on a voluntary basis, he
could not have said he had a power given to him and the other
apostles. Rather, he could only make a request. (Seiglie 1995, 12)
It is assumed in his article that the seventh chapter of
Hebrews gives authority to Christian ministers to accept the tithes that
were formerly to be donated to the Levitical Priesthood (12). As has
already been shown, this view is in keeping with the tradition of his
Church that includes the doctrine of tithing in its Fundamental Beliefs.
Regarding the dietary laws of the Pentateuch that are the basis
of the more elaborate kosher laws of Rabbinic Judaism, Seiglie notes that:
The food laws are mentioned for the first time in the account with
Noah (Genesis 7:2). No servant of God in either the Old or New Testament
is found to ever eat pork or break any of the other food laws. The
opposite is true. All the available evidence points to godly
people observing the food laws with regard to clean and unclean animals.
(Seiglie 1995, 12) [italics his]
The following statement of Seiglie clearly illustrates how
ministers and lay members of his church view their responsibility towards
Old Testament dietary laws. In a brief summary of a passage that in my
opinion is often poorly exegeted in evangelical circles, Seiglie explains
that:
Luke records many years after the death of Christ that Peter, even as
a Christian, had never eaten anything unclean (Acts 10:14). Continuing
with the account, Peter is quite confused by the vision of the unclean
animals until God soon reveals to him that it had nothing to do with
food, but with accepting gentiles in Christian fellowship rather than
considering them to be "unclean" (Acts 10:28). (Seiglie 1995, 12)
We can again note that the United Church of God fully
recognizes that there were changes from the Old Covenant to the New.
However, a basic way of life, including financial laws, dietary laws, and
weekly and annual observance, remained normative. The Judaic heritage of
Christianity should not be discarded:
Any changes to the godly way of life established for Christians in
the New Testament are clearly explained, not only through abundant
teachings, but also with the clear examples of Christians practicing
them. (Seiglie 1995, 12)
Mario Seiglie's final paragraph is quite representative of
the perspective of his church and its ministry:
I want to be a man of God. My wife wants to be a woman of God. What
better way is there for us to learn how to live a life pleasing to God
than to simply follow the biblical examples of the men and women of God?
I think we are in good company. (Seiglie 1995, 12)
The challenge to the Commandment Keepers is to explain
certain passages of scripture which, on the surface, indicate that
Christians are not required to adhere to the specific details of the
Hebraic law. If one takes an objective stance, these passages are actually
few in number and are nearly all in the Pauline portion of the New
Testament. The most challenging scriptural passages for
Commandment-keeping sects are found in the Epistle of the Apostle Paul to
the churches in Galatia.
It should be noted that the New Testament itself warns against
misapplying the writings of the Apostle Paul. This phenomenon was already
occurring at the time of the writing of Second Peter:
So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom
given to him,
Speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are
some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable
twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. (2
Peter 3:15- 16)
Let us develop this point a bit further. It is generally
believed that the Gospel of John was written after Paul's death. It can
also be argued that Luke's Gospel was written after the Pauline epistles.
Both Luke and John can be used as corrections to those who might be
tempted to place an overly anti-nomian interpretation on the writings of
Paul. As has already been stated, the hermeneutic employed is typical of
many religious communities who view the Bible as an inerrant basis for
doctrine. It assumes that canonical books may differ in style and emphases
but do not flagrantly contradict each other in areas critical to belief
and practice. For example, it would seem pointless to expend effort to
explain how to keep the Sabbath properly, in a non-oppressive manner, if
Sabbath observance itself were not to be perpetuated in Christianity. Yet,
the Gospels deal extensively with that issue.
Commandment-keeping exegetes share a defensible case when they
point out that what Pauline teaching discards from Old Testament are the
disciplinary measures. The procedures and penalties that supply external
pressure to be righteous are not enforced by the New Testament Church. The
related system of sacrificial rituals is now redundant for the person who
has repented of sin and accepted the rule of Jesus Christ in his or her
life.
The writings of John Calvin, as we have already seen, take a
similar approach. However, as shown earlier, Calvin considers the Sabbath,
Holy Days, and dietary laws to be in the category of those laws made
redundant, at least for gentiles, by Christ's atoning ministry. In
addition, Calvin also differs from contemporary Commandment-keeping
sectarians in his Augustinian approach to the role of the Church and its
members in society. This theological difference has been of major
historical importance. The heritage of Calvinism is for the church to
exercise influence in society directly through participation by its
members in politics and warfare.
An ethicist should strive to follow the formula referred to in
Chapter Two, disagree without being disagreeable. In addition, scholars
should be seeking to acquire authentic data and to analyze it properly. I
contend that scholarship is not about scoring points in some theoretical
competition, but about the accurate transmission of information and the
objective interpretation of it. Keeping those principles in mind, this
author wishes to record his befuddlement when he read in The New Oxford
Annotated Bible these comments on the letter of Paul to the Galatians:
Here are set forth, with impassioned eloquence, the true function of
the Mosaic law and its relation to God's grace manifested in Christ. The
declaration of the principles reiterated in these six chapters made
Christianity a world religion instead of a Jewish sect (263 NOTE).
As a scholar of religion, I beg to differ. It is valid to
argue that Christianity sought to differentiate itself from Judaism. It is
not valid to argue that only by so doing in a radical fashion could
Christianity have become a world religion. In the first century of the
common era Judaism was an expanding religion, and a religion more similar
to Judaism than mainstream Christianity could have succeeded in becoming a
major world religion as had, Islam, an example already briefly cited.
Islam is a major world religion, challenging Christianity for
supremacy. In recent years many African-Americans have considered
themselves Muslims. Yet, as mentioned in Chapter Two, Islam is very
similar to Judaism. A specific significance is given to the original
Arabic text of the Koran (Esposito 1995, Volume I, 91-7, Volume III,
385-91). One of the five pillars of Islam is a pilgrimage to Mecca, in
Saudi Arabia (Volume I, 88-89). Muslims pray in the direction of
Mecca (Volume II, 469-471). Muslim dietary laws have some
similarity to those of Judaism. The eating of pig is prohibited. Unlike
Judaism, Islam also prohibits the consumption of alcoholic beverages (Volume
I, 375-377). Moslem dress for women resembles the approach taken in
Orthodox Judaism. Prominent African-Americans have taken Arabic names upon
converting to Islam. An authoritative reference work states concerning
conversion to Islam that:
Adoption of what came to be considered Muslim names and of
specifically Muslim types of dress, especially the modest attire
required of women, were also expected in order to differentiate the
convert from former co- religionists. Ceasing to eat pork and to drink
alcoholic beverages also came to be considered symbolic breaks with the
past. (Esposito 1995, 320)
There is, perhaps, a hint of Luther's anti-Jewish perspective in the
notion that Christianity needed to divorce itself from its Jewish roots to
become a world religion. Islam has not found it necessary to divorce
itself from its Arabian roots.
Some Bible readers interpret Colossians 2:11-17 to be telling
Christians that certain Old Covenant laws are no longer necessary under
the New Covenant. The context, however, was a conflict with an ascetic
philosophy, from Paul's perspective, a humanly devised system that
undermined the soteriological efficacy of submission to Christ.
In 1989, a Worldwide Church of God theologian, Kyriackos J.
Stavrinides, published an article entitled, "The Colossian Heresy." The
article displayed the scholarship for which Stavrinides is well known in
his ecclesiastical community. Its usefulness in the theological debates of
the middle and late 1990s spurred its dissemination among Commandment
Keepers.
The article explained:
Paul is not saying that there was no value to obeying God's law. He
is saying that any act one could care to mention--circumcision, keeping
new moons, Sabbaths, etc. (2:11-17)--cannot replace or transcend Christ.
(Stavrinides 1989, 27)
According to Stavrinides:
This passage is often lifted out of context of the Colossian heresy
and quoted in isolation as proof that Paul was doing away with the law.
An example of this accusation is found in Acts 21:21, where Paul is said
to have forsaken Moses and dismissed the customs, including circumcision
(a confusion of what Paul was really teaching). (27)
The final paragraphs of the article remind us that:
The Colossian heresy, then, can be seen, in context, to have been
caused by Jewish Christians who had fallen prey to early Gnostic
teachings. Paul, in turn, addressed this local problem, not by reference
to the Old Testament. The Old Testament is nowhere quoted in Colossians
because it is not in question. He addressed the problem directly, by
centering the minds of the Colossians on the completeness and fullness
in which they shared as veritable members of the Body of Christ. (27)
Commandment Keepers in their writings often refer to the
annual biblical holy days as annual Sabbaths, as much a part of God's
religion as the weekly Sabbath every Saturday. In 1995, one of the
African-American pastors serving the United Church of God submitted an
essay to the publication, In Transition, which evaluated material
in Acts in the light of related passages in the Pauline epistles (Epps,
9). Towards the conclusion of the essay, the author opined:
In summary, the "Acts" could stand for Apostles Confirm The Sabbaths.
Luke's diary reveals that the Holy Days continued to be observed by Jews
and gentiles during the writing of the epistles. (Epps 1995, 10)
I do agree, however, that Galatians can be understood as ". .
. the Magna Charta of Christian Liberty." The question that
Commandment-keeping exegetes would pose is, "From what are gentile
Christians being liberated?" For those sectarian expositors, it was not
Paul's intent that Gentiles reject a Torah-based culture.
According to Commandment Keepers, the Epistle to the Galatians
teaches that gentile Christians have no need of circumcision, nor for the
sacrificial system to which circumcision gave access. As participants in
the New Covenant they are not subject to Old Covenant enforcement
procedures such as fines, corporal punishment, or capital punishment,
outside of their legal obligations in civil society. Moreover, their
approach to God's law should not be legalistic, emphasizing physical
detail, but rather should focus on spiritual intent. For example, a New
Covenant observance of the Sabbath need not equate with a full Talmudic
observance. A Commandment-keeping hermeneutic will read the Pauline
epistles through the prism of the book of Acts. The Lukan Paul does not
forsake his Pharisaic heritage for an expedient antinomianism.
According to a recently published booklet by United Church of
God, an International Association:
The internal evidence of the New Testament shows that Christ's
apostles and their converts continued to assemble on the seventh day,
the Sabbath. They observed the day, however, with a renewed emphasis on
the "new" person God is in the process of creating. The relationship of
the seventh day to their lives grew in its importance to them. . . .
(Foster 1998, 36)
In an earlier booklet, originally written by Herbert W.
Armstrong, the position of the Worldwide Church of God was stated thus,
"God gave man His Sabbath, for the purpose of keeping mankind in the true
knowledge and true worship of the true God" (1985, 36). The booklet
includes a later section entitled, "Sabbath for Gentiles today." The
section contains the following short paragraphs:
The Sabbath was made for man'for mankind'for Gentile as well as
Israelite.
God Himself made His Sabbath binding forever'(Ex.
31:12-17). It is binding forever, perpetually, throughout their
generations, on Israelites. Their generations have not ended. Forever
has not ended.
Israelites become Christians through Christ, the same as
Gentiles. Israelite Christians, then, are bound to keep God's Holy
Sabbath.
But what about Gentiles? They, too, must keep it. They
become Israelites, spiritually, when they receive God's Holy Spirit and
become truly converted Christians.
God does not have one way for Jew, and one for Gentile. He
does not have one day for Jew, and another for Gentile. Christ is not
divided! God is no respecter of persons! (Armstrong 1989, 53-54).
In my youth, I attended an Orthodox synagogue which often had
a weekly Saturday morning attendance less than one-tenth of the crowd that
appeared for the High Holy Days, Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. On those
special days, most people attending services were living in only partial
conformity with Orthodox Jewish norms. There is an analogy with first
century Christianity. Its original constituency either came from the
Jewish community or was heavily influenced by that community. Keeping the
Old Testament commandments concerning personal conduct remained the ideal.
It is likely that over time, many others began associating with
Christianity who had less exposure to Judaism and less commitment to it.
There are no New Testament examples of church observance of
extra-biblical religious holy days. Nor are there any references to a
converted Christian, once obtaining that status, having consumed any food
product prohibited in the Old Testament. To reiterate, over the course of
time, many others became a part of the community who probably had little
or no background in Judaism. It is easy to see how a drift away from
Judaic norms could have occurred in the standards of the Church as a
whole.
Few if any historians of religion would dispute the proposition
that early Christianity was more flexible than Pharisaic Judaism
concerning certain knowledge or practices required of new converts. It can
also be contended that it was not with apostolic consent that Christianity
dropped adherence to Torah norms. This was, possibly, a later development
that found justification in certain New Testament passages. The
abandonment by Christianity of the Hebraic festivals and dietary laws
perhaps was never actually approved by the authors of the books of the New
Testament canon. Scholars of religion have generally accepted the
anti-Judaic interpretation of certain New Testament passages. This
acceptance was due partially to the assumption that the dominant view in
Christianity regarding the Torah had also been the authentic one, the
apostolic view. There is textual evidence to the contrary.
Permit me to draw an analogy to modern Marxism-Leninism. Was
Stalin the true ideological heir of Lenin or was Trotsky? This question
was once hotly debated among the denizens of the political left. A similar
debate may again become important among scholars of religion. Whatever one
may think of the religious views and practices of the original Christian
Apostles, in which branch of contemporary Christianity would those first
century Church leaders be most at home? For most people, the question may
not be critically important. For believers who see an eternal validity to
the religion of the first century Church, the question is critically
important to ask and to answer.
Of course, a Commandment-keeping hermeneutic is not currently
popular in Christian exegesis of the New Testament, but it is at least
defensible. It is even more believable when noted against the backdrop of
the scriptures that warn of a powerful apostasy that was already a concern
of several New Testament authors. The manner in which this heresy is
described would lead a reader to think of it as antinomian in nature. The
fourth verse of the Epistle of Jude warns:
For certain intruders have stolen in among you, people who long ago
were designated for this condemnation as ungodly, who pervert the grace
of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus
Christ.
Every Hanukkah, devout Jews remember the struggle against
Antiochus Epiphanes IV and the efforts of Hellenizers to stamp out
Commandment-keeping in Judea. In the Second Epistle to the Thessalonian
Church, the author speaks of a future "man of sin," "that lawless one,"
who will behave in a similar fashion and will be destroyed by the "ephiphaneia"
of Christ's coming (2:8).
The Thessalonian Christians were also warned that " . . . the
mystery of lawlessness is already at work . . ." (2 Thessalonians 2:7).
One purpose of the Johannine writings may have been to counteract this
antinomianism. For example, the seventh chapter of the book of John makes
a point of Jesus' observance of the Feast of Tabernacles, and in the tenth
chapter, Jesus is apparently in Jerusalem celebrating Hanukkah (10:22). At
this point, it would be appropriate to note that the United Church of God
does not expect its members to celebrate Hanukkah. It is perceived to be
specifically Jewish. Of course, that festival is not commanded in the
Pentateuch. The Feast of Tabernacles, however, is observed. It was
commanded in the Pentateuch and observed by Christ and the early apostolic
church. It is thus perceived as not specifically Jewish. It is perceived
as part of a commanded regimen for God's people through the ages. It is a
very important occasion in the sectarian churches of God (Overton 1966,
1).
The Seventh Day Adventist Church has certain Judaistic practices
in common with the sectarian churches of God, such as UCGIA (Ogwyn 1995,
55-56). Both groups trace their ancestry to the pre-Civil War Millerites
(Cross 1950, 310-317). However, in its Fundamental Beliefs, the
United Church of God states:
We believe that the seventh day of the week is the Sabbath of the
Lord our God. On this day we are commanded to rest from our labors and
worship God, , following the teachings and example of Jesus, the
apostles and the New Testament Church (23).
We believe in the commanded observance of the seven Annual
Holy Days that were given to ancient Israel by God, were kept by Jesus
Christ, the apostles and the New Testament Church, and will be observed
by all mankind during Christ's millennial reign. These Holy Days reveal
God's plan of salvation. (27).
Samuele Bacchiocchi, a Seventh Day Adventist scholar,
recently came to the conclusion that he should publicly endorse the
observance of the annual festivals of Leviticus 23:
I was wrong in assuming that the annual Feasts came to an end with
the sacrifice of Christ, simply because they were connected with the
sacrificial system of the Temple. I came to realize that the continuity
or discontinuity of the Feasts is determined not by their connection
with the sacrificial system, but by the scope of their typology. If the
Feasts had typified only the redemptive accomplishments of Christ's
first Advent, then obviously their function would have terminated at the
Cross. But, if the Feasts foreshadow also the consummation of redemption
to be accomplished by Christ at His second Advent, then their function
continues in the Christian church, though with a new meaning and manner
of observance. (1995, 13)
In a volume on the autumn festivals, Bacchiocchi states that:
The feasts commemorate the redemption already accomplished through
Christ's first Advent and typify the final restoration that will be
realized at the second Advent. Thus, they unite the past redemption to
the future restoration. (1996, 13)
I would like to add an additional consideration. A religious
ritual or observance can be perpetuated as a reminder of an historical
reality. Such a function for a ritual may be highly regarded by the
community involved in the observance. In the secular realm, for example,
historical events, particularly battles that were decisive in a nation's
history, are frequently reenacted. So a holy day could be considered
worthy of preservation even if not specifically linked to an event that
has not yet occurred.
For many of the various Commandment-keeping sectarian Churches of
God, the festivals of Leviticus 23 are critically important reminders of
core theological truths.
Seven annual festivals were given to Old Testament Israel and were
ordained forever. Their true meaning had long remained a hidden mystery.
They picture God's plan of redemption'the divine plan by which God is
reproducing himself. The Passover pictures the death of Christ in
payment for the penalty of human sin repented of. The seven days of the
Festival of Unleavened Bread picture the Church coming out of sin, even
as Israel came out of Egypt. The Day of Pentecost, originally called
Feast of Firstfruits, pictures the Church as the first to be begotten
and born as children of God during the Church age. The Feast of Trumpets
pictures the Second Coming of Christ to take over earth's throne and to
rule all nations. The Day of Atonement pictures the putting away of
Satan. The Feast of Tabernacles pictures the thousand- year reign under
the rule of Christ and the born children of God. The Final Great Day
pictures the final judgment. (Armstrong 1985, 201-202)
In March of 1999, UCGIA began distribution of a booklet
entitled The Church Jesus Built. Regarding the festivals of
Leviticus 23, the booklet states:
Most churches teach that the festivals were "nailed to the cross,"
that they were somehow annulled by Christ's death. Yet the unmistakable
record of the Bible is that the early Church continued to observe them,
but with greater grasp of their spiritual significance. (Foster 1999,
66)
The above paragraph is contained in a subsection entitled,
"What Did the Early Church Believe and Practice?" The following statement
concerning Sabbatarianism can also be found in the subsection:
If we are to observe any day as a weekly day of rest and worship,
shouldn't it be the same day Jesus Christ and the apostles kept? (67)
Toward the conclusion of the subsection, the following paragraph
appears:
Nowhere do we find popular religious holidays such as Christmas
approved in the Bible. The only time Easter is mentioned in the Bible
(Acts 12:4, King James Version), it is a blatant mistranslation of the
Greek word for Passover. Lent and its practices are nowhere found. (67)
As would be expected the Church also commits itself to the following
statement:
We believe that these meats that are designated "unclean" by God in
Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 are not to be eaten. (United Church of
God 1998, (30)
Other sectarian Christian communities have taken note of the
Old Testament dietary laws. In commenting on the practices of the
Rastafarians, Jack A. Johnson-Hill notes that:
Where feasible Rastas consume an I-tal diet, consisting of food which
is organically grown and which adheres to Deuteronomic and Levitical
prohibitions regarding pork and scaleless fish. (25)
In years to come the "battleground of ideas" will include the
pronouncements of the sectarian Churches of God making a case for a more
Judaic version of Christianity. Conservative Christian exegetes would be
expected to disagree with such an interpretation of the Christian way of
life. Many members of the Commandment-keeping community plan to increase
media efforts to share their views. As these views become more widely
known, many members of mainstream denominations may come to feel
increasingly challenged by them.
The sectarian Churches of God already have experience in the use
of magazine ads, radio programs, television programs, and the Internet to
bring positive publicity to Commandment-keeping Christianity. There is a
likelihood that members of mainstream denominations will perceive the
sectarian media campaigns to be a rather sophisticated effort to "Judaize"
their religion. The Commandment Keepers are ironically making use of the
most advanced technology available to share ideas and promote their views.
They will probably rebut criticism from the dominant churches by declaring
that the sectarian churches of God simply want to popularize "the faith
which was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3).
