We’re about to begin a series of articles that will examine how the modern church has misappropriated and misinterpreted certain New Testament verses in their attempts to invalidate the importance of keeping the Sabbath day holy.
However, before we begin our analysis, there are two important foundational questions we need to ask ourselves.
1) Did Paul ever contradict the teachings of Christ?
and
2) Did Paul ever break Jewish law (Torah)?
So let’s start with question one: Does Paul contradict Christ?
First, what does Christ Himself have to say about the Law?
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”-Matthew 5:17-19
Look, if we accept traditional church teaching that the Sabbath is done away with, optional or can be changed, we’d have to come to the conclusion that Paul contradicted Jesus.
If that’s the case, then we might as well dump our Bibles in the trash.
However, we don’t have to worry about that because Paul’s teachings do not ever contradict Jesus’s teachings.
The above Scriptures make it clear that until heaven and earth disappear the validity of the Law stands.
Jesus said that he came not to “abolish” but to “fulfill” the Law.
“Fulfill” does NOT mean to “finish” but to “complete”.
The Greek word is “pleroo“.
Any reputable concordance will tell you that “pleroo” means to “fill up” or “to accomplish”.
For example, if you want your empty glass refilled with water, “pleroo” would be the appropriate word to tell a waitress at a restaurant.
It literally means to fill up.
When you ask your waitress to fill up your glass with water, you’re not asking her to terminate or put an end to your glass, are you?
In the same sense, Jesus came to fill the Law with meaning and bring its meaning to its fullest purpose.
This is what “pleroo” means.
My point is, when we come across a couple of passages that seem to imply that the Sabbath has been done away with or that we can make the Sabbath any day we choose, such an interpretation cannot possibly be correct because it would contradict Christ and the foundational principle that God NEVER changes.
It would be a classic case of Biblical contradiction.
We would also have a situation of the disciple challenging his master.
Can you see how ridiculous it is to have Jesus say that the Law will never be changed or abolished and then have Paul turn right around and say the opposite?
Fortunately, that is not what Paul says. Let’s move on to the second question.
Did Paul ever break Jewish law?
If Paul actually taught that the Sabbath was done away with, or that God’s eternal commands concerning the Sabbath are no longer valid, then he has disobeyed Jewish Law and disregarded the very sign that God gave to Israel in the Mosaic Covenant.
Even if the argument that Jewish believers are still subject to Torah while Gentile believers are not were true (which by the way, is not), such a line of reasoning wouldn’t be applicable here because Paul was a very patriotic and proud Jew.
So did Paul ever break Jewish Law or say that parts of it were now done away with? Let’s take a look at some New Testament verses.
In reply, Paul said, ‘I have committed no offense — not against the Law to which the Jews hold, not against the Temple, and not against the Emperor.’”-Acts 25:8
“After three days Paul called a meeting of the local Jewish leaders. When they had gathered, he said to them: ‘Brothers, although I have done nothing against either our people or the traditions of our fathers, I was made a prisoner in Yerushalayim and handed over to the Romans.'”-Acts 28:17
The above Scriptures make it clear that NOT ONLY did the Apostle Paul NOT go against the Law (Torah) but that he also kept the “traditions of our fathers”, meaning that he scrupulously adhered to the Jewish oral law traditions.
Let’s get something straight.
Sabbath observance was the very center of Jewish Law and life.
If Paul was running amuck telling people that it was okay to stop observing the Sabbath or the Biblically ordained feasts, he would have been committing a very serious offense against Jewish Law (I’m talking about the death penalty) AND…
…he would be contradicting the plain words of His Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
This is the point I want you to keep in mind as we begin Scripture tear-downs of certain New Testament verses that the church has traditionally used to teach that the Sabbath is no longer valid.
STAY TUNED!!!
First and foremost, keep up the good fight in bringing light to the permanance of YHVH’s Torah. I hope you will consider this one word of correction considering this article “Did Paul ever contradict Christ of break Jewish Law?” While I agree that there is no scriptural warrant to claim that Paul set out to break any of the Torah. If he did, he would not be able to plead with others to imitate him as he imitates Messiah (1Cor. 11:1), as it is clear that Yahushua was perfectly faithful to His Father’s Torah. However, suggesting that Paul scrupulously kept the Oral Law because he stated he had “done nothing against either our people or the traditions of our fathers” creates a certain problem. Yahushua spoke openly in opposition of the oral Torah of the scribes and Pharisees because there were doctrines of men being taught to the people as the word of YHVH. Therefore, Paul would not be an imitator of Yahushua unless he too opposed the oral law traditions. For instance, Yahushua denounces the hand washing traditions of the oral Torah (Matt. 15:1-14). Surely, it is possible for the “traditions of our fathers” Paul speaks of to mean the traditions found within the written Torah of YHVH, after all, some of the fathers were faithful to the Torah…Abraham, Moses, David, etc. Also, consider that Paul had repented from Pharisaism which was steeped in oral Torah. The Torah of YHVH states that we are not to add to or take away from it, but that is exactly what the oral Torah does. For example, in the Talmudic tradition of washing the hands, a specific prayer is recited and must be recited in a precise manner. Not only is this not found in the written Torah, but within the accompanied prayer is the claim that God commands them to wash their hands in this ritualistic fashion, thereby claiming that YHVH has spoken when in fact He has not. Yahushua was faithful to His Father’s Torah when He came in opposition to the man-made traditions found within the oral Torah. Wouldn’t it be logical, therefore, to state that Paul indeed did repent from keeping said man-traditions so that he may too be faithful to his Father’s commands. I hope this has blessed you in your search for truth and please feel free to contact me if you think that I am in error.
Hi Sean, I don’t think I would really be in disagreement with what you said. However, I don’t necessarily think ALL of oral Torah was wrong. Some things were wrong. Some things were in align with Torah. Yeshua spoke out against the former. SHalom.
Hi
I am in agreement with almost all you said but I need to point out to you that Paul never “repented from “Pharisaism”.
Towards the end of his ministry, first in Acts 23: 6 he said “I am a Pharisee.” And in Acts 26: 5, he also said ” Iiving as a Pharisee.”
I am a Christian but probably align more to being a Messianic Jew as I am a traditional Sabbath keeper despite all my Christian brothers and sisters insisting the contrary. (Seventh Day Adventists are similar to Messianic Judaism but they go off the deep end with Ellen White is their prophetess they adhere to.) Their main argument is that of the Ten Commandments, keeping the Sabbath is not mentioned New Testament. Omission does not negate, especially when both YAHSHUA and Paul appeared to keep the Sabbath themselves. Christians often use Paul’s letter to the Romans as the foundational rules of the church yet Paul clearly and explicitly contends that the law is good. These are the same Christians that argue that we need do nothing, that all our sins are forgiven past, present and future–keep on sinning, which Paul clearly denounces. “Sin is death.” The modern church is a mess, with Christians living a lifestyle of sin while sounding pompous and pious speaking gibberish “tongues.” I have read many blogs claiming Paul contradicts YAHSHUA’s’ teachings but he actually compliments them. All the N.T. writers one MUST have faith in YAHSHUA the Messiah and keep His commandments. My unpopular book “To Hell In A Handbasket” (by John J Briggle) is a warning to “once saved-always saved” Christians but you can understand why it is a book no one wants to read.
To close, the message of YAHSHUA and Paul are clear and consistent with YAHSHUA, perhaps a slightly different focus but Paul often cites that he was preaching the gospel of the Messiah.
Thank you for sharing John. Agree with you that the modern church is a mess of gargantuan proportions…which is why I left it long ago…and why many others are leaving it in droves.