Teaching Team
The Double-Standard of Abolishing Torah
President Obama is definitely seen in religious terms: by some as a messiah-like figure, by others as the Antichrist. But imagine what would happen if, at the end of his term, Obama arose and declared, "Over the course of the past four years I have fulfilled the Constitution of the United States perfectly. Now that it is fulfilled, its authority over this nation has been put to an end in me. Today I tell you, the United States has only one law: that you love one another."
First of all, this situation is absurd. For one, every good president fulfills the Constitution. That just means that they properly execute what it says and means. Doing a good job at that does not entitle a president to any special status, claim, or reward.
Second, the Constitution is not a problem waiting to be solved. The Constitution does not include a clause stipulating that if someone manages to keep it perfectly, then it no longer applies. One person being constitutionally faithful does not give other people the right to be un-constitutional.
Third, the Constitution is the foundation for the entire legal system of the United States. Without it, there is no basis for law or justice whatsoever. In fact, without the Constitution, there would be no such thing as a president, since it is the Constitution that provides the foundational definition of that office. The president's authority is derived from the Constitution. If the president canceled the Constitution, he would be nullifying his own authority and office.
Furthermore, if the Constitution--and by extension, all of the legislation that is founded upon it--were to be canceled, then the nation itself would cease to exist. There would be no boundaries and no definitions, only chaos. There would no longer be such a thing as the United States of America.
Seeing these disastrous consequences, people naturally rise up to defend the Constitution whenever they perceive that it is in jeopardy--sometimes with nearly religious patriotism. This is good and right.
The Constitution of the Jewish Nation
To some Christians, the Torah served a limited purpose: to reveal the Messiah, his identity, mission, and our need for him. Once it has served that purpose, it is little more than a relic of the ancient past. I have even heard some Christians say that even by attempting to observe the Torah's laws, one becomes an "enemy of the cross." (Please note, my intention is not to mock or ridicule Christians or Christianity, but merely to confront and register disagreement with a point of view that is shared by some of them.)
But this view has the same problems as the hypothetical situation above. Sure, the Torah teaches us about the Messiah, just as the Constitution teaches us about the president. But anyone who legitimately claimed the office of Messiah would have to be rigorously observant of the Torah and uphold it. They would have to see to it that it is properly interpreted and enforced. That is a central part of the Messiah's task, just as it is the task of all judges, rulers, and kings provided for in the Torah. Any officer who fulfills the Torah in this way is just doing their job. If they do not, they are considered wicked.
Likewise, the Torah does not include any provision that one may cancel it by keeping every law. There is no mechanism by which one person keeping the Torah perfectly alleviates everyone else from the responsibility of doing so. Sure, there is the concept of mutual responsibility for one another (arvus/arvut, ערבות), where the righteousness or wickedness of some individuals has an affect on others because of the unity of the people. But still, each individual is still responsible for his own observance. For example, Moses' righteousness put him in a position to be able to attain mercy from God after the sin of the golden calf. However, even though Moses attained forgiveness for the people, that does not mean that those people have no responsibility to be obedient themselves.
But does this metaphor of a constitution apply to the Torah? Yes; in fact, I think this is one of the best comparisons available in modern times. And that is where much of the misunderstanding comes in. Many people view the Torah as serving a doctrinal or educational purpose, or as a source of inspiring quotations. Even some people who are Torah observant view it as merely a personal guidebook to life. But that is not the context in which it was given. The primary role that the legal component of the Torah played in ancient Israel was that of the foundation of government. The ancient Israelites were a civilized nation. They had judicial courts. They didn't (as some folks imagine) execute some sort of savage vigilante justice system where people threw rocks at each other. They had a foundational legal document--the Torah--and they built upon that foundation, just as governments do today, through legislators and case precedent. This process continues even today.
Even in the land of Israel, the Torah was essential for maintaining and preserving the Jewish national identity. When the Jewish people were removed from the land, the Torah became even more essential in preserving Jewish national identity. Through God's gift of the Torah, the Jewish people still managed to remain a distinct nation even outside of physical borders.
National Suicide
Today, "Jewish" is not a race or culture. It never was. It is a nationality. The genetic similarity, common language, and other cultural or ethnic features that sometimes manifest are simply byproducts of a people being bound together by a common national identity. This nation has a legal foundation, which is the Torah.
But if someone were to ask the Jewish people to give up the Torah, the Jewish nation (by which I mean the Jewish people globally, not the modern State of Israel) would lose all definition and become absorbed into the surrounding nations. There would be nowhere you could point and say, "those are Jewish people." The cultural, genetic, and linguistic ties would dissipate through assimilation. When Christianity demands of Israel that they give up the Torah, they are asking them to give up their God-given national identity. That is asking for national suicide. Thus, in a way, rejection of Torah observance is doctrinally anti-Semitic, albeit indirectly and unintentionally.
It is hypocritical to demand that Israel's constitution be abolished and replaced by a few ethical sentiments, while at the same time devoting oneself to the preservation of your secular nation's legal framework. How can Christians keep and enforce the laws of secular governments, which are the mere products of human reasoning, while abolishing the legal system established by God? Which one is more enduring, righteous, profound, and true?
Search in Blogs...
Browse through Blogs
Feeds
Use this RSS feed to track our blogs in your favorite reader.
The FFOZ Blogs RSS Feed
Blogs by Category
- Back Office
- Events and Administration
- Founder’s Blog
- Guest Authors
- Lessons from the Land
- Levertoff Documentary
- Mishlei Musings
- Publications
- Road Trip 09
- Shalom Tour
- Teaching Team
- The Siddur Project
- Torah Club
- Video Blogs
- Site Info Blog
Blogs by Author
- Aaron Eby
- Boaz Michael
- D. Thomas Lancaster
- FFOZ Staff
- Guest Authors
- Media Staff
- Hope Egan
- Seth Dralle
- Toby Janicki
More Recent Posts
- Shameless Self-Promotion
- Is the Bible B.S.?
- Becoming A Better Boss
- Remembrance and Repentance
- Passover and the Death of James the Just
- Hosting Your First Passover Seder
- Devil's Children
- Vacation Time
- Visit Israel with FFOZ
- A KISS from me to you
Visitor Feedback:
OUTSTANDING!
Kip B Hurst | October 27, 2009 5:44 AM
If "Jewish" is a nationality, then where is this nation? And why are you sitting here in America?
Blessings
Dan
Dan benzvi | October 27, 2009 1:52 PM
Dan,
This nation is in exile, scattered all over the earth. I hope and believe that the existence of the modern State of Israel is a hint that the exile will soon be over, but so far that is not the case.
Peace
Aaron
Aaron Eby
|
October 28, 2009 8:12 PM
Hi Aaron, very interesting post. But a couple of points I want to make, I'm interested to what you think:
You wrote: "rejection of Torah observance is doctrinally anti-Semitic" - are you sure? I mean, there are plenty of Jews I know who don't like Torah but aren't themselves anti-Semites, and they can recognise anti-Semitism.
I appreciate you qualified this with "albeit indirectly unintentionally", but still, I don't think it's anti-Semitism, just a different opinion.
I don't think the USA depends on its constitution to be a nation. The nature of the nation currently may do, as may the authority of its president. But if you were to remove the Constitution, the nation itself would remain surely?
Also, isn't the point of the Constitution to encourage citizens to behave responsibly. But if they were inspired by love rather than fear to behave responsibly, would they still need a Constitution?
Yeze | October 29, 2009 8:56 AM
Just as the law was added because of transgression, so too the Constitution. It is our protection against tyrrany and if we lose it we would indeed cease to be a nation, subject to the whims of whoever happens to be in power at the time. The Constitution defines us as a nation, just as the Torah defines us as believers, providing guidelines for how we conduct ourselves.
MJ Belko | October 29, 2009 9:49 AM
Yeze,
You'll also notice that I used the term "doctrinally" anti-Semitic. I don't mean that people who believe this necessarily hate Jews, but since the doctrine itself results in the annihilation of the Jewish people, the doctrine itself is anti-Semitic.
The Constitution is the basis of all law in the United States. The judicial branch of government has the task of making certain that any law that is passed in the United States is in harmony with the Constitution. The Constitution is what ensures basic human rights, separation of powers, and the democratic process. If the Constitution were abolished and not replaced by something directly equivalent, there would be no legislation, justice, or enforcement of law. Yes, I think that it is quite safe to say that the nation as we know it would no longer exist.
Being inspired by love is a nice idea, and it should be the motivating factor for all of our personal decisions. But as long as we live in this world and have free will, it is not possible for any nation to be governed by it. The opposite of law is not love, it is lawlessness.
Besides, if you look at what the prophets say about the future messianic era, they clearly state that the Messiah will take the role of an arbiter of law, and that the entire world will be governed by Torah. (See Boundary Stones, "The Law Will Be the Rule of the Messianic Kingdom.") Yeshua even said to his disciples that they would be seated on twelve thrones, judging the tribes of Israel. Since a Torah-based justice system is the plan in place for the messianic era, how much more should it be the case today!
Aaron Eby
|
October 29, 2009 10:05 AM
Most excellent article. I am a member of a tradional shul, but am Messianic. This article is 100% correct, to a Jew, and hopefully to Christians.
David Roth | November 1, 2009 8:36 AM
What a joy to read this article! As a gentile believer I can readily identify the concept of how the Torah identifies who is Jewish and who is not. I have a love for the land of Israel and its' people that is God given. By His mercy I have been born again, grafted into the vine that is the true Israel and called a "son" by Him who adopted me into His family. To cancel Torah observance is to do away with the law that led me to Messiah. He, like Moses, fulfilled Torah and attained mercy for me but that does not mean I have no responsibility to obey Torah myself. "Jewishness" is not a race or culture. It is a nationality, the vine into which I have been grafted and by adoption made a citizen. Praise God! Rejection of Torah would be to reject all that God had done for me and to ask me to abandon Torah is to ask me to abandon my God and my family. Praise God for allowing me to be a child of Abrahams' faith, chosen by Messiah to be a citizen in a nation without physical borders.
Dawn Jacobson | November 1, 2009 11:57 AM
I think being "Jewish" is a lot more than "nationality". The Jewish people, first and foremost, are children of Ya'akov, a family. Our ethnic ties, the "genes", the Jewish culture (in its various expressions acquired primarily while in diaspora), our peculiarities, quarks, faults and triumphs are not simply a byproduct of people bound together through millennia, they are an expression of being direct flesh and blood descendants of the patriarchs.
Gene Shlomovich | November 2, 2009 9:55 PM
"Also, isn't the point of the Constitution to encourage citizens to behave responsibly. But if they were inspired by love rather than fear to behave responsibly, would they still need a Constitution?"
Yeze... how does a Jew express love for his G-d? Is it a warm fuzzy feeling of love, a fleeting emotion? No, our love for G-d is meaningless unless expressed by being obedient to his Torah (just as our love for fellow man is meaningless unless backed up by concrete acts). As Yeshua himself said:
"If you love Me, you will keep My commandments." (John 14:15)
and also, in 1 John 5:3 it says: "For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments..."
How can we say that there's no longer a need for constitution (if we have love), when this very constitution (Torah) tells us which "commandments" we are to keep and how we are to keep them in order to express our love of HaShem? Such is the dilema of antinomial theology.
Gene Shlomovich | November 2, 2009 10:10 PM
Gene, I would agree with you if it wasn't for the fact that all throughout history, there has been an influx of people who are not Jewish by birth into the Jewish people. Regardless of how you feel about it, conversion is a reality, and converts have always been seen as fellow Jews.
Aaron Eby
|
November 4, 2009 8:00 PM
This post clearly implies that non-Jewish believers in Messiah must not become Torah observant. If, as the author states, the Torah is essential for maintaining Jewish national identity — so that the Jewish nation could be a distinct nation even outside the physical borders of the Land — then the obliteration of this distinction should be avoided. First, by the throwing off of the yoke the Torah by the Jews themselves. Second, by the taking on of this yoke by non-Jews. In the first case the Torah is abolished; in the second case it is universalized. In both cases the Torah ceases to be the distinctive definer of the Jewish nation.
One can question the presuppostion, however, that the Torah was given for the sake of maintaining Jewish identity. For this would mean that Jewish identity is the goal and the Torah only the means for preserving it. One would be inclined that it is rather the other way round.
Ronald Sevenster | November 15, 2009 1:52 PM