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).
