Notable Quote: Thomas Jefferson
“Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus.”
From a letter to W. Short published in The Great Thoughts by George Seldes (Ballantine Books, New York, 1985, p.208).
–Thomas Jefferson
Paul promoted the concept of Law-less-ness
Now we need to look at more of Paul’s errors in doctrine… especially those that suggest that a person is not expected to live by God’s Law. We have seen that Paul’s doctrine concerning the sovereignty of God and predestination is wrong, and his use of Scripture to prove his doctrine is downright abusive. Paul has told lies, and he is without a doubt the very false apostle that Yeshua commended the Ephesians for rejecting.
Still, Paul did make some pro-Law statements along with his anti-law statements, and he never does reconcile the contradiction. Indeed he couldn’t! Either God expects us to live by His Law or He doesn’t. There is no in-between. But to be fair, I must make mention of the fact of his pro-Law statements, because, among the growing sects of Messianic believers, there is a small number who call themselves “observant” Messianics. They continue to believe, as Yeshua taught, that the Law stands today. But in their endeavor to maintain some semblance of credibility with other Messianics, who themselves are really nothing more than Christians with a Jewish flare and an umbilical cord attached to mainstream Christianity, these observant Messianics will engage in bend-over-backward apologetics for Paul and do everything they can to argue he was pro-Law. Apparently, they continue to feel the need to embrace the picture of an infallible New Testament. But we shouldn’t at all be surprised about the fact that Paul made both pro, and anti-Law statements because of some other very telling statements he made. He said to the Corinthians:
“…to the Jew I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law, that I might win those who are under the Law; to those who are without Law, as without Law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without Law; to the weak I became as weak, that I might win the weak, I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.”
1 Corinthians 9:20-22 NKJV
At the very least, it is apparent that Paul was a chameleon who blended with his surroundings whatever they were at the time! Paul clearly taught contradictory messages for the purpose of making everybody happy… something you would never find Yeshua doing. As long as there are numerous, clear anti-Law statements made by Paul, Christians and non-observant Messianics alike will always point to them and rest their case against the “legalistic” observant Messianics. There is no simple misunderstanding about it. Even Paul’s contemporaries accused him of encouraging both Gentiles and Jews to abandon the Law of Moses. This debate is nothing new. It is a significant issue in the book of Acts. Paul’s contemporaries had him there in the flesh to explain himself and straighten out the misunderstanding if indeed it was so simple. But the obvious seems to go unnoticed… the issue is never settled in the book of Acts. James, the leader of “myriads” of Messianic Jews, never did come to Paul’s rescue when you would think he certainly would have if it had all been just a simple misunderstanding.
Soon you will see, as more of Paul’s anti-Law doctrines are exposed, that the observant Messianic’s endeavors to salvage Paul’s reputation are truly hopeless. They would be better off facing the fact that Paul was a false apostle, call him on it, and suffer the ostracism of Christianity. They aren’t having any significant success convincing anyone that Paul was pro-Law anyway.
The book of Romans
The book of Romans is considered by many Christians to be Paul’s masterpiece argument against justification by the Law of Moses in favor of justification through faith by grace. In trying to deal with Paul’s errors, one can quickly become bogged down in the terribly convoluted lines of logic that he uses. In dealing with his logic, it is not just a simple matter of untying a series of knots in a long string. His logic is more like one big twisted ball of knots made of knots! Anyone who tries to make a serious attempt at understanding Paul’s doctrine has an extremely difficult time following his rambling flow of logic. To deal with all of Paul’s nonsensical logic in the book of Romans alone would take an entire book. I’m not going to take the space to do that here, but what I will focus on are the fundamental premises on which he bases his doctrines, and most importantly his ongoing blatant abuse of Scripture in support of them. This alone totally discredits Paul as an apostle. His entire building will come crumbling down when these foundations of his doctrine are shown to be built on sand. For this chapter, I will deal with only the keystone portion of his nonsensical logic.
One of Christianity’s favorite Pauline passages that clearly suggests we ought not to bother trying to keep God’s Law comes from the first part of the book of Romans. Right off… in chapter 1, Paul tries to establish some fundamental premises on which to continue building his doctrine. He says;
For in it (the gospel) the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “The just shall live by faith”.
Romans 1:17 NKJV
This was a favorite passage of the Christian reformer Martin Luther. He believed, as Paul clearly lays out later in Romans and Galatians, this faith that the “just” are supposed to live by, is seen to be as opposed to living by the Law. In short, Paul eventually turns it into an either/or mutually exclusive incompatibility of faith and Law. It’s one or the other in his world. It can’t be both. Notice that Paul felt compelled to prove his doctrine by quoting Scripture. It should go without saying that the Scripture he quoted had better paint the same picture, or his premise is groundless. Again, Paul has subtly misquoted what is less than half of one sentence of Scripture from Habakkuk. The full sentence reads:
“Behold the proud, his soul is not upright in him, but the just shall live by his faith.”
Habakkuk 2:4 NKJV
When this passage is considered in its fuller context and is more accurately translated, it becomes clear that what God is saying is this: The just person (someone who is righteous) shall live (as opposed to dying) “by” (literally “because of”) his faithfulness: (literally, “steadfastness”). So the question is, faithfulness and steadfastness to what? Answer: righteous law-abiding living which is the definition of a just person! An accurate paraphrase of this passage would read: The righteous person will live if he is steadfast and faithful to his righteousness! Nowhere in this picture is there the idea of an unrighteous person becoming righteous solely because of his faith. Not only is this passage not about faith alone, the context demands that we understand the “just” person is just and righteous precisely because he is law-abiding!
This one subtle abuse of Scripture by Paul is only the beginning. From here, he builds on his doctrine by continuing to make more blatant abuses that end up taking him and his doctrine into extreme error. By the end of the book of Romans, Paul is so far off it’s hopeless! Now watch where he goes from here in Romans chapter 3.
Romans chapter 3
When someone suggests to an evangelical Christian that the Law of God still stands today, one of the first defenses to refute the suggestion comes from Romans 3. We are quickly informed that no one is able to keep the Law, and all are guilty of breaking it and are therefore forever unrighteous.
As it is written: “There is none righteous, no, not one”.
Romans 3:10 NKJV
This verse is a quote from Psalm 14 that Paul used as proof that man cannot become righteous through the keeping of the Law. Here is Paul’s entire passage from Romans 3 which is his proof-text for his doctrine that no one is capable of being righteous.
10 As it is written: “There is none righteous, no, not one; 11 there is none who understands; there is none who seek after God. 12 They have all gone out of the way; they have together become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no not one. 13 Their throat is an open tomb; with their tongues they have practiced deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips; 14 whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. 15 Their feet are swift to shed blood; 16 destruction and misery are in their ways; 17 and the way of peace they have not known. 18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.”
Romans 3:10-18 NKJV
This is Paul’s supposed direct quote from Scripture that is his end-all-debate proof that no one is righteous. Guess what? No such passage exists! What Paul quotes is a compilation of no less than six separate passages that have been jerked out of their original context in the Psalms and the book of Isaiah, strung together to appear as one quote, and given an interpretative spin that cannot be found in their original contexts. We have seen this deceptive practice before when we looked at Romans 9 where Paul pasted together two short passages from Genesis and Malachi in an attempt to get us to believe God hated Esau before he was born.
Paul’s accuracy in quoting from the Psalms is no better. The first passage he quotes in verses 10-12 comes from Psalm 14. Here is his version again first.
As it is written: “There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands; there is none who seeks after God. They have all gone out of the way; they have together become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no, not one.”
Romans 3:10-12 NKJV
Now here is the passage quoted accurately, and in its context.
The fool has said in his heart, “there is no God“. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none who does good. The Lord looks down from heaven upon the children of men to see if there are any who understand, who seek God. They have all turned aside, they have together become corrupt; there is none who does good, no, not one. Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge, who eat up my people as they eat bread, and do not call on the Lord? There they are in great fear, for God is with the generation of the RIGHTEOUS.
Psalm 14:1-5 NKJV
In this Psalm, David is speaking specifically of atheistic fools! There is none among them who do good. David is not speaking of every human being as Paul wants us to believe. He is speaking of a distinct group of people whom he describes as fools, atheists, workers of abominations, corrupt, ignorant, and workers of iniquity. Of course, not one of them does good. The Psalm then goes on to contrast these evil people to another group of people who are called “my people” and “the generation of the righteous”. Imagine that! “The generation of the righteous.” Paul conveniently neglected to tell us about this part of the Psalm. This Psalm alone proves that there are those whom God calls “righteous”! This is hardly the picture Paul would want us to get from this Psalm. Notice also Paul’s embellishment of this passage. He would have us believe the phrase, “no, not one” is used twice when it is only used once. The first time Paul uses the phrase “no not one” is where it doesn’t exist, and it is coupled with the word “righteous”. The word “righteous” does not exist anywhere near the words “no, not one“. The word “righteous” only shows up later in verse 5, and there, it clearly states that there are those who are righteous!
In Paul’s string of quotes in Romans, he continues to take snippets of Scripture out of their context from Psalm 5:9, Psalm 140:3, Psalm 10:7, Isaiah 59:7,8, and Psalm 36:1. In each and every case, the unrighteous individuals spoken of in these passages are specifically evil men, and in the greater context of these passages, the evil men are contrasted with those who are called “the righteous”, “the upright”, and “the innocent”. Please check for yourself. Not only is there no support for Paul’s picture in these passages, but in their proper context, the exact opposite is often firmly established.
Scholars who support Paul like to refer to this practice of gluing a number of passages together as “pearl-stringing”. Considering the fact that each supposed “pearl” is essentially a lie, I can think of a more fitting metaphor from the barnyard to describe what it is that Paul is stringing!
God calls some, “righteous”!
Paul wants us to believe that no one becomes righteous through the works of the Law. But there are many whom God called “righteous”. From Genesis 7:1 where He says to Noah, “I have seen that you are righteous before Me in this generation”, all the way through to the New Testament where Yeshua says, “many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it…”. There are many references to “righteous” men. Take an exhaustive concordance and look under the word righteous.
Paul’s bazaar and blasphemous lie
After deceptively quoting Scripture to try to convince us that no one can become righteous by keeping the Law, Paul is left to find for us a good working reason as to why God gave man the Law in the first place! Here is his logic.
“Now we know that whatever the Law says, it says to those who are under the Law, that (for this purpose) every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the Law is the knowledge of sin.”
Romans 3:19,20 NKJV
This begins to defy words to describe the blasphemous lie that it is. But hey! Paul has to come up with some reason for the Law’s existence after demolishing the truth about it! Are we really to believe that it was God’s purpose to make men guilty before Him by establishing a law that He knew men couldn’t keep? If God intentionally made His Law impossible for men to keep, that would make God the author of unrighteousness on a couple of levels! Both man’s and His own! He would be unrighteous Himself simply in making it impossible for man to live up to His demands. Paul’s logic isn’t just stupid, it’s blasphemy!
If one is familiar with Greek philosophy and how it portrays good and evil, not as enemies competing with each other, but as partners, where the purpose of each is to establish the other. This effectively blurs all lines of difference between the two and eventually makes evil good and good evil. Paul’s doctrines are full of this nonsense. Here’s what God says about that kind of philosophy:
Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil: who put darkness for light, and light for darkness…
Isaiah 5:20 NKJV
Good and evil are not partners. They are enemies! Only evil wants people to think good has partnered itself with evil. God did not give the Law to make sure the world became guilty before Him. That’s just plain nuts! Here’s God’s version of why He gave the Law.
“Oh, that they had such a heart in them that they would fear Me and always keep all My commandments, that (for this purpose) it might be well with them and with their children forever!”
Deuteronomy 5:29 NKJV
“And the Lord commanded us to observe all these statutes, to fear the Lord our God, for our good always, that (for this purpose) He might preserve us alive, as it is this day. Then it will be righteousness for us, if we are careful to observe all these commandments before the Lord our God, as He has commanded us.”
Deuteronomy 6:24,25 NKJV
Paul’s blasphemous lie, that makes God out to be some kind of pathological tyrant who commands people to obey Him when He knows they can’t… just to keep them guilty, humiliated, and begging for grace and mercy, is by itself more than enough to finish off Paul and nail his hide to the wall as a false apostle. Yeshua never taught anything remotely close to this.
But we are still long from being finished. Paul goes on to describe some collateral benefits that go along with his evil picture of God. Now the logic flows that if no man is capable of doing God’s Law, and salvation is instead granted as a free gift of grace, then no one can brag about keeping the Law anymore!
Where is boasting then? It is excluded, By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the Law.
Romans 3:27,28 NKJV
In a well-known passage from the book of Ephesians, Paul reiterates the identical logic.
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.
Ephesians 2:8,9
Really?! Since when did God take it upon Himself to make it impossible for man to boast? Paul seems to have forgotten the fact that one of God’s commandments is for man to humble himself! If a person kept the whole Law he wouldn’t be boasting in the first place.
“He has shown you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.”
Micah 6:8 NKJV
Notice also what it says about Moses who gave the Law.
Now the man Moses was very humble, more than all men who were on the face of the earth.
Numbers 12:3 NKJV
God has never been in the business of making it impossible for man to boast. He just makes it not worthwhile for those who do. The irony is that in the real world, Paul’s doctrine is the source of far more pride and boasting than any other doctrine! One only need look at Paul himself and notice how he lifted himself above the very apostles who followed Yeshua (2 Corinthians 11:5, Galatians 2:6,9), and how he even lifted himself above Moses by belittling him in 2 Corinthians 3:11-13. Anyone who believes that God has actually destined before creation some vessels for honor and some for dishonor (Romans 9:20-23), and also believes that he just happens to be one who is destined for honor, cannot avoid thinking way too highly of himself because he would then actually have grounds on which to boast!
From the presupposition that God intentionally made the Law impossible to keep, Paul’s flow of logic now becomes even more absurd. Since in Paul’s world, no one can keep the Law, man must, therefore, be justified by “faith alone“ apart from the deeds of the Law! Now he uses Abraham as proof.
Abraham: Justified by faith?
Abraham’s supposed justification by faith is Paul’s ace-in-the-hole argument for faith apart from the works of the Law both in the book of Romans and the book of Galatians. The following passages are from these two books and contain his supposed direct quote from the book of Genesis.
What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something of which to boast, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”
Romans 4:1-3 NKJV
…just as Abraham “Believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness“.
Galatians 3:6 NKJV
So fundamental is Paul’s use of Abraham as a proof-text example for his “apart from works” doctrine that James becomes fully aware of it and refutes it in his epistle.
Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”
James 2:21-23 NKJV
James’ logic here is far superior to Paul’s, but the disappointing thing about James’ rebuttal is that he could have done a better job and perfectly squashed Paul’s pet argument forever! One reason it is obvious that James is directly addressing Paul’s doctrine is by virtue of the fact that James’ quote from Genesis is identical to Paul’s …and in error! My guess is that James had copies of Paul’s letters in front of him when he wrote his letter and he mistakenly assumed Paul had quoted Genesis accurately, probably because it sounded very close to what he remembered of it. So he used Paul’s quote and went about refuting Paul’s doctrine on other logical grounds. But in doing this, he appears to have agreed with Paul that Abraham was justified by faith. After all, that’s what Paul’s quote from Genesis appears to indicate. But James goes about arguing that Abraham’s faith was a faith made of works, as opposed to Paul’s faith without works. If James had gone down to the local Synagogue and scrolled through the book of Genesis to see if Paul’s quote was perfectly accurate, there is little doubt he would have dealt with Paul’s doctrine differently. The difference is subtle in appearance at first, but Paul’s version is nonetheless extremely misleading. The accurate quote from Genesis is in the following passage.
Then He brought him outside and said, “Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them.” And He said to him, “So shall your descendants be.” And he believed in the Lord, and he accounted it to him for righteousness.
Genesis 15:5,6
Notice the difference that here it says, “and he accounted it to him”, as opposed to Paul’s, “and it was accounted to him…”. Paul’s quote left out the pronoun “he”. You might be thinking, “What’s the difference? Aren’t they still saying the same thing?” Answer: Not at all! The question is, to whom is this pronoun “he” referring? If it’s referring to God, then the word “it” is referring to Abraham’s faith as Paul would have us believe. But if the first “he” is in reference to Abraham, then the “it” is referring to the promise that God gave to Abraham and therefore has absolutely nothing to do with his faith.
Because Christian Bible translators often work from the assumption that Paul knew what he was talking about, they assume the pronoun “he” in the last sentence (Genesis 15:6) is in reference to God. So they capitalized it to indicate that it was God who accounted something to Abraham. But in the Hebrew text there are no such distinctions made, nor are there any indicators in the word itself as to whom the pronoun refers. The Hebrew language makes much use of pronouns this way, and at times it can be confusing for English-speaking people. We prefer to have the person identified more regularly. You may have noticed in the short passage above that there are seven pronouns and Abraham isn’t even named! We only know it’s Abraham from two verses earlier! The Hebrew language assumes intelligence upon its readers to figure out to whom the pronouns refer from the context in which they are used. The first key to understanding the identity of the person this particular pronoun refers to comes from the fact that the sentence this phrase is found in begins by changing the subject of the sentence from God to Abraham. Read the entire passage again and notice how it changes at “And he believed in the Lord…” Obviously, this passage is not suggesting that the Lord believed in Himself! Therefore, at this point, the subject changes and begins to refer to Abraham… and he believed in the Lord. Would it not be prudent to assume that the subject of the first clause of the sentence, Abraham, follows through as the subject of the second clause as well? This is proper Hebrew (as well as English) syntax. Experts agree. In Professor Victor P Hamilton’s New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Eerdmans 1990), in Vol. 1 page 425 we read:
The second part of this verse records Yahweh’s response to Abram’s exercise of faith: ‘he credited it to him as righteousness.’ But even here there is a degree of ambiguity. Who credited whom? Of course, one may say that the NT settles the issue, for Paul expressly identifies the subject as God and the indirect object as Abraham (Rom. 4:3). But if we follow normal Hebrew syntax, in which the subject of the first clause is presumed to continue into the next clause if the subject is unexpressed, then the verse’s meaning is changed… Does “he”, therefore, continue as the logical subject of the second clause? The Hebrew of the verse certainly permits this interpretation…
Victor P Hamilton’s New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Eerdmans 1990), Vol. 1 page 425
These are the honest and objective insights of a man who is unquestionably pro-Paul! Another excellent in-depth article concerning the “he” being in reference to Abraham and not God can be accessed at Jewish-Christian Relations website, article: www.jcrelations.net/en/?item=752
Therefore, the most accurate translation of Genesis 15:6 should read: And he (Abraham) credited (reasoned) it (the promise) to him (self) for (because of his) righteousness. In other words, Abraham believed God gave him the promise because he was a righteous man! The reason why God gave Abraham the promise is identical to the reason why He gave Noah the promise to save him from the flood. God literally said to Noah; “…because I have seen that you are righteous before Me…” (Gen. 7:1) Abraham had walked in God’s Law and actually merited God’s favor and knew it! This concept of meriting God’s favor is something many Christians, especially Calvinist Christians, choke hard on. Merited favor implies works again. But this is exactly what happened here with Abraham. This will be proven once and for all in a moment. But first, be aware of something God said in the same scene where He promised to multiply Abraham’s descendants.
On the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying: “To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates…”
Genesis 15:18 NKJV
Now, let’s look at something God said to Abraham’s son Isaac a number of years later. Notice in the following passage that God makes reference to everything He promised to Abraham on that same day. Most importantly, take notice of why God said He gave Abraham the promises. God said to Isaac:
“Sojourn in this land, and I will be with you and bless you; for to you and your descendants I give all these lands, and I will perform the oath which I swore to Abraham your father. And I will make your descendants multiply as the stars of heaven; I will give to your descendants all these lands; and in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; BECAUSE Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My Laws.”
Genesis 26:3-5 NKJV
Nowhere does God say anything to Isaac about Abraham’s faith! The promises were all given because of Abraham’s works! God gave Abraham the promises because Abraham was a righteous man and had merited God’s favor and subsequent promise. Abraham was not justified by faith as Paul would have us believe. He was justified by works! God could not have made that fact any more plain to Abraham’s son Isaac!
Moving on:
Grace and mercy versus Law and works?
In Romans, Paul goes on to reiterate and drive home his picture of grace versus works with more nonsensical, as well as non-Scriptural, Greek-inspired, philosophical logic. The remainder of Romans is sprinkled throughout with this picture all founded on the assumption that no one can become righteous under the Law and that God made the Law impossible to keep for the very purpose of keeping man humble and reliant on His good graces. We have also seen his twist of Scripture taken from the story of Abraham. Now Paul again blasphemously makes God responsible for man’s sin with this piece of sterling idiocy. See if you can hear the Greek philosophy underpinning it.
“Moreover the Law entered that (for this purpose) the offense (sin) might abound. But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more, so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
Romans 5:20 NKJV
Again Paul draws the mutually exclusive picture of Law versus grace in the following:
“For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under Law but under grace.”
Romans 6:14 NKJV
Later, in Romans, Paul uses an analogy from the time of Elijah to make his grace-versus-works point.
But what does the divine response say to him (Elijah)? “I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.
Romans 11:4-6 NKJV
Paul’s logic here is so stood on its head and his proof demonstrated with smoke and mirrors that it’s almost humorous. It would be funny if so many didn’t actually believe this is the infallible word of God! The only thing that Paul derives from what God said to Elijah is that He had reserved a “remnant” for Himself. Nothing more! Never mind the fact that these seven thousand men had themselves remained true to God’s Law and not bowed their knee to Baal, which sounds like “works” to me! But then, to keep the illusion going, Paul states that this new remnant of saved Israel is “according to the election of grace”. This he bases on the assumption that he firmly established the concept of predestination and the election by grace earlier in the infamous passages of Romans 9. This detestable doctrine is itself based on numerous misquotes of Scripture as I have shown. But now Paul continues to build lie on top of lie with the Greek-style philosophical logic that if salvation is by grace, then it is no longer by works; otherwise, grace is no longer grace! This is psychobabble! It’s complete and utter nonsense! Where is it written that grace and works are mutually exclusive concepts… other than in Paul’s writings? Paul had previously tried to establish this principle that the two concepts cannot go together with the following sleight-of-hand:
“Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.”
Romans 4:4 NKJV
This sleight-of-hand is accomplished by renaming elements in the equation much the way an abortionist would never call an unborn child “a baby”. If Paul can get away with calling obedience to God “work”, then he can get away with calling the benefits of that work “wages”, and if we continue to follow him down this road we find out that wages are really a “debt”! Oh no! Who would want to be accused of being so presumptuous as to bill God for grace?!! Phew! Let’s back up and start over. What Paul calls “work” is really obedience to God. God is the One with the bill! He made us and demands the payment of obedience. His grace and mercy are benefits (not wages) of doing business with Him. No one, no matter how obedient, can presumptuously demand payment from God. To do so would involve disobedience to the Law concerning walking humbly with God! Anyone who is obedient and walks humbly with God can have all the faith in the world that He will favor them and provide the benefits of grace and mercy that He promised. This is where true faith exists! Doesn’t this sound so much more simple and right? Even a child can grasp this picture. Paul’s doctrine is nothing but a convoluted mess that people can only pretend to make sense of.
Now let’s look at Scripture and notice whom God deems worthy beneficiaries of His grace and mercy.
So the Lord said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I regret that I have made them.” But Noah found GRACE in the eyes of the Lord. This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a JUST man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God.
Then the Lord said to Noah, “Come into the ark, you and all your household, BECAUSE I have seen that you are righteous before Me in this generation.
Genesis 6:7-9 and 7:1 NKJV
No one else on earth found grace or mercy from God except one man and his family because he was “just” and “righteous“! Contrary to Paul’s doctrine, becoming a beneficiary of God’s grace has everything to do with works. Grace and works are not mutually exclusive. They are inextricably connected to one another.
There is more.
For the Lord God is a sun and shield; the Lord will give grace and glory; no good thing will He withhold from those who WALK UPRIGHTLY.
Psalm 84:11 NKJV
For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who LOVE ME and KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS.
Exodus 20: 5,6 NKJV
But the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting on those who fear Him, and His righteousness to children’s children, to such as keep His covenant, and to those who remember His commandments to do them.
Psalm 103 17-18 NKJV
And the list goes on. Paul’s concept of the separation of grace and works is as unscriptural as it can be. Absolutely nothing concerning grace and Law has changed since Yeshua… or Adam for that matter. Men who lived before Yeshua were no less treated to God’s wonderful grace and mercy, and man today is under no less obligation to obey God’s Laws.
The remainder of Paul’s errors I will set aside for now. They naturally come crashing down with the fact that their foundations have crumbled. So now the question is, if the Law stands, what laws are we expected to observe.
Which laws stand?
If one were to ask the average Christian if it were acceptable to murder someone because Christians aren’t under the Law according to Paul, you would be told: “Of course not”. Then it would be explained that God still expects Christians to live by the moral code as embodied in the ten commandments. How this supposedly fits with Paul’s either/or… grace or Law doctrine is never satisfactorily reconciled. But nevertheless, they are quite adamant that we must still keep the ten commandments. When asked about the fourth of the ten commandments, which is to honor the Sabbath day, we are told that Paul dealt with that particular commandment in his letter to the Colossians.
“Therefore let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.”
Colossians 2:16,17 NKJV
So I guess there are really only nine commandments that Christians need to observe! But then, if you listen to Christian teachers–and especially televangelists–it becomes apparent that there is another commandment that continues to stand. It seems that they are most adamant about this one. The one law that you will continually hear reinstated is the commandment to give a tenth (the tithe) of one’s income to support the ministry of the Gospel! Isn’t this an interesting re-inclusion? I guess maybe this one commandment is to replace the one concerning the Sabbath so we are back at ten again! This re-inclusion of tithing law should be seen for the convenient institution-serving thing that it is. Preachers will quote from the Law over and over again to guilt their followers into giving to the church. One favorite Scripture passage is the following.
“Will a man rob God? Yet you have robbed Me! But you say, ‘In what way have we robbed You?’ In tithes and offerings. You are cursed with a curse, for you have robbed Me, even this whole nation. Bring all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be food in My house, and prove Me now in this,” Says the Lord of hosts, “If I will not open for you the windows of heaven and pour out for you such blessing that there will not be room enough to receive it…”
Malachi 3:8-10 NKJV
When these words hit the ears of the faithful, things begin to happen. Who wants to be guilty of robbing God… and worse, being cursed for it? And who doesn’t want God to bless them so much they can’t contain it?
When it comes to which of the laws of God are applicable today, it should go without saying that the individual is responsible before God to keep only the laws that God expects an individual to keep. God gave numerous laws to the nation of Israel and to the priests that no individual is capable of carrying out today. For example, I cannot prepare myself and go walking into the Holy of Holies on the day of atonement and make atonement for my home nation… for many reasons. It was the sole responsibility of the High Priest to make atonement for Israel alone, and only then when there is a temple and a Holy of Holies in existence in Jerusalem in the first place. Likewise, the Law of God concerning the tenth of one’s income is very clear. It was given as a command to the nation of Israel for the purpose of supporting the priestly tribe of Levi because they were given no other inheritance in the land of Israel. (See Deuteronomy 14:22-29) God Himself was their inheritance (Numbers 18:20-24) so in commanding the remaining 11 tribes of Israel to give a tenth to the Levites, it was considered paying a debt to God. That is why God saw withholding the tithe from the Levites as robbing Him and took it personally as He spoke through the prophet Malachi. But we don’t have a Levitical priesthood today. To claim that the leaders of the Christian church are today’s equivalent of the priesthood is wishful thinking in light of Paul’s false apostleship and the fact that God does not officially recognize any religious institution on earth today.
There is a place for giving, and it is good to give. If a person wants to give and have true reward in heaven, they should do as Yeshua said and give directly to the poor. Matthew 19:21 Luke 19:8,9
The point is that there is no consistency in Christianity’s rejection of the Law. It has obviously become a pick-and-choose whichever laws suit the best interests of the institution at the time.
Every “jot and tittle”
Yeshua fully endorsed the Law and the Prophets. To reiterate His say-so:
“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill (give official sanction). For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the Law till all (heaven and earth) is fulfilled (come to pass). Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.”
Matthew 5:17-19 NKJV
Yeshua’s reference to “jot” and “tittle” of the Law is of utmost significance here. At that time in history, there were two distinct groups of laws. There was the written Law, and there was the oral law. It was taught by the Pharisees that the oral law was also given by Moses for the purpose of detailing how to carry out the written Law. This was supposedly handed down through the ages by word of mouth to special people like the Pharisees. This picture is disprovable in light of Israel’s history as recorded in 2 Kings 22, and 2 Chronicles 34. There, it is recorded that Israel found the written books of Moses that had been lost for some time. When it was read, it was something the people hadn’t heard before. If Israel had lost and forgotten the written Law, how can we be expected to believe there was an ongoing oral law that gave details on how to carry out the written Law?
Yeshua also made these comments concerning the oral law.
He answered and said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honor Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me, and in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men–the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do.” And He said to them, “All too well you reject the commandant of God, that you may keep your tradition.”
Mark 7:6-9 NKJV
The idea that God gave Moses oral laws and that they have been passed down is simply not true. Yeshua called them the mere commandments of men. On another interesting side note, the modern Catholic church has borrowed from this successful method of duping and controlling the gullible masses. It is referred to as “apostolic succession.” It is taught that the secret doctrines of Christianity were given by Yeshua to his apostles who were the first bishops. And since the first century, “there has been an unbroken line of Catholic bishops faithfully handing on what the apostles taught the first Christians in Scripture and oral tradition.” Doctrines such as the perpetual virginity of Mary, the communion between the living and dead saints, the eucharist, and so on, are taught by the church as secrets that have been passed down by church authorities since Yeshua. But there is not a shred of truth to the Catholic church’s claim to divine authority or the doctrines it promotes. Just like the notion that the oral law was passed down from Moses, there is not a shred of truth to the notion that Yeshua’s secret teachings have been passed down orally by the bishops from the time of the apostles.
Many of the Pharisees of Yeshua’s time intimidated and exerted control over others with an air of superiority based on their knowledge of the oral law. Their oral traditions eventually became written down and today are known as the Talmud. Most of modern Judaism is really Talmudism much the way modern Christianity is Paulinism. Back when Yeshua said, not one “jot or tittle” of the Law would pass away, he was intentionally disenfranchising the oral traditions of the Pharisees and speaking only of Moses and the prophets that were in writing at that time. The words “jot” and “tittle” are specific terms referring to something written.
What Part of the written?
As mentioned, only the laws that are applicable to the individual are the ones the individual is responsible to keep. The first and greatest Law is to love the Lord God with all one’s heart. If one truly loves God, they will want to walk in all His ways in an effort to please Him and win (merit) His favor. The sad truth is that most people have such a distorted concept of God’s character, thanks to Paul, that it’s impossible for them to truly love Him. It is only to the degree that a person can identify with the character of another that they will be able to love that person. Good decent people do not identify with the character of a psychopath, yet that is the character that Paul and subsequently much of Christianity have laminated on God. Any being who would demand that people keep his laws which are designed to be impossible to keep so that he can keep them ridden with guilt and in need of his mercy is a psychopath! Yet this is exactly the picture of God that Paul has painted and is reinforced in churches. The devil has won his greatest victory in this by making it impossible for man to fulfill God’s greatest longing, which is to be loved. God is good, and righteous in everything He has ever done. No being has had more lies told about Him. He will never exact from a man something he cannot deliver. And every man will be judged righteously on what they DID with what they were given.
If you know this about God, it becomes easy to love Him and to want to show it. Some of God’s laws that are directed toward loving Him, as opposed to loving one’s neighbor, including the laws of cleanliness and honoring what He has honored. These would include dietary law, laws concerning apparel, physical cleanliness, and honoring the Sabbath, and observing the feast holidays. The remaining laws come under the heading: Love your neighbor as yourself. These laws include laws against murder, theft, deception, adultery, and so on.
If one comes from a Christian background, and out of love for God desires to start walking in His ways, they can start immediately by beginning to observe His day… the Sabbath. This is seen by God as one of the greatest expressions of love for Him because it honors what He has blessed, and it is the ultimate expression of recognizing Him as the six-day creator of heaven and earth. All Christian creationists should automatically recognize the importance of honoring God’s Sabbath.
One can also start following God’s Law by cleaning up their diet and refraining from eating meat that God says is detestable and unfit to eat. Most Christians believe that God told Peter through a vision that all meat had been cleansed. This is a complete misunderstanding. Please see my article: Peter’s vision: To eat, or not to eat? Part 1 and Did Yeshua pronounce all foods clean? To eat, or not to eat? Part 2
Back to Outline ——- Next Chapter ——- Home ——- Contact