Exposition Galatians 6: 7-10

⁷ Don’t delude yourselves: no one makes a fool of G-d! A person reaps what he sows.

⁸ Those who keep sowing in the field of their old nature, in order to meet its demands, will eventually reap ruin; but those who keep sowing in the field of the Spirit will reap from the Spirit everlasting life.

⁹ So let us not grow weary of doing what is good; for if we don’t give up, we will in due time reap the harvest.

¹⁰ Therefore, as the opportunity arises, let us do what is good to everyone, and especially to the family of those who are trustingly faithful.

The law of the harvest is not only that a person reaps what he sows, whether good or bad, but that the harvest is always greater than the planting—“thirty, sixty or a hundred times as much” (Mt 13:8, 23). As Yahshua interprets Torah love for our neighbors He adds love for our enemies and the unlovable as well. Yahshua enjoins his followers “to love one another” as “I have loved you.” Only believers can give and receive this kind of love, since it grows out of having the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit).

In order to fully expound on this week’s portion we have to examine what preceded it, and explore some of the thinking that has evolved from the study of these scriptures.  Not only do we have to start with the traditional Christian view that Yahshua abrogated the supposedly legalistic Torah of Moshe, inaugurating in its place, a “Law of Love,” but we have to address the doctrine of the immutability of Torah in traditional Judaism.  

Yahshua during His first event did exactly as He was expected to do according to traditional Jewish thought of that time. Judaism taught that when the Messiah appeared He would correctly interpret Torah and counsel us on the proper way of being obedient to it. However, since traditional Judaism does not recognize Him as the Messiah and dismisses the B’rit Chadasha they do not His “changes within the sameness of Torah.” That may startle you for Torah was changed within its sameness but not abrogated, as we shall see. The sages taught that only the Messiah would be truly capable of explaining the Torah to us, and as I have earlier taught, the Sermon on the Mount precisely accomplished that. Within those scriptures we find that Yahshua interprets and teaches us the spiritual element of Torah, which not only incorporates proper material obedience, but also includes understanding Torah through the transforming of our minds, which includes our motives and intent as well. 

In Gal 6:2 we find this phrase: “Bear one another’s burdens”—part “b” of this verse should be translated, “in this way you will be fulfilling the TorahÕs true meaning, which the Messiah upholds.” In Greek, The Torah’s true meaning, which the Messiah upholds, is ton nomon tou Christou, “the law of the Messiah,” a phrase found only once in the B’rit Chadasha (New Testament.)

What is interesting is that this same phrase appears in the Midrash Rabbah on Ecclesiastes 11:8:

“The Torah which a person learns in this world is ‘vanity’ in comparison with the Torah of the Messiah.”

And it’s meaning is essentially the same as in this verse: the Torah as it will be taught by the Messiah himself, the Torah as upheld by the Messiah.

The question might arise from those that believe the Torah is done away with is whether Yahshua instituted a new Torah different from the Torah given at Mount Sinai. In other words, is fulfilling “the law of the Messiah” different from fulfilling the Law of Moshe? Instead of Torah as given to Moshe has it been condensed to instituting a “Law of Love,” with all that is misunderstood about love. This view comes into direct conflict with one of the most firmly held tenets of Orthodox Judaism, the eternity or non-abrogability of the Torah. Each morning Orthodox Jews repeat in their prayers the Yigdal hymn, which affirms that

“G-d gave the Torah of truth to his people through his prophet, who was ‘faithful in his house’

“G-d will not alter his eternal Law Or exchange it for another.”

The “prophet … faithful in his house” referred to here is Moshe (Numbers 12:7) but there is a midrash on it in Hebrews 3:1–6, where Yahshua is presented as the greater prophet of G-d superceding Moshe. Moshe himself made such a prediction. Starting from this premise, Yahshua would have every legal right to change Torah, as His authority is superior to that of Moshe.  

Nevertheless, so often ignored because it is contrary to antinomian thinking is that Yahshua himself reassured his hearers that he had not come to abolish the Torah (Mt 5:17). He also said, that not one jot or tittle shall pass from it until there is a new heaven and earth. As of this minute I have not seen a new heaven or earth come into being. On the other hand we have to realize that the eternity of the Torah does allow for changes in its historical manifestation and application to society; indeed Judaism itself provides numerous examples. Torah is as living today as it was in ancient Israel. We are compelled to find new applications of Torah principles instead of literal applications because of the society we live in, but Torah is just as viable now as then. Moreover, Jewish tradition includes a significant strand of expecting that when the Messiah comes, there will be a transformation of Torah. We see this addressed in Hebrews,  (MJ 7:12) where it deals with a new priestly order after the order of Malki-Tzedek. It is “change within sameness,” but not abolishment of Torah.

Change within sameness is a problem Messianic Jews must face, not only with Christians, but also with traditional Jews. Christians maintain that Torah is abrogated and Jews maintain the eternity and immutability of Torah. As we study the citation given in the Book of Hebrews we see that the Levitical order is supplanted by the order of Malki-Tzedek, who preceded the Levites. The Midrash is that since Abraham gave offerings to Malki-Tzedek, a priest of G-d on High, the Levites, still in Abraham’s lions paid tithes to Malki-Tzedek through Abraham. Thus showing the superiority of the Malki-Tzedek priesthood to the Levitical priesthood. So there is “change within sameness.” 

In the Encyclopedia Judaica’s article on “Torah” (Volume 15, pp. 1244–1246). It points out,

“In the [Hebrew] Bible there is no text unanimously understood to affirm explicitly the eternity or non-abrogability of the Torah; however, many laws of the Torah are accompanied by phrases such as, ‘an everlasting injunction through your generations’ (Lev. 3:17, et al.).”

The rabbis interpreted Deuteronomy 30:12 (“It [the Torah] is not in heaven”; and in Numbers 36:13 (“These are the commandments”) to imply that the whole Torah has already been given. [This would negate the B’rit Chadasha being given as Torah]. Therefore the Babylonian Talmud can say, “A prophet is henceforth not permitted to innovate anything” (T’murah 16a), although he may suspend a law temporarily (Sifre Deuteronomy 175).

Messianic Jews are not subject to Oral Torah and there is no reason why Messianic Judaism needs to accept this rabbinic impediment to change. In fact in Hebrews 8:6, we have scriptural proof that the B’rit Chadasha was given as Torah. It reads in the Jewish NT:

Hebrews 8:⁶ But now the work Yahshua has been given to do is far superior to theirs, just as the covenant he mediates is better. For this covenant has been given as Torah on the basis of better promises.

These better promises primarily relate to the Temple cult and His Sacrifice.  Nevertheless, even if, the B’rit Chadasha is not accepted as Torah it still would not apply to Yahshua. For Yochanan the Immerser was already “more than a prophet” (Mt 11:14), and he called Yahshua yet “more powerful than I” (Lk 3:15); Moshe also said He was greater than I, therefore the Messiah by kal v<chomer, was not subject to the supposed restrictions on prophets.

Even so, a change in Torah, not the abrogation of it, is not implausible within the framework of Jewish tradition, for, the article adds,

“The rabbis taught that the Torah would continue to exist in the world to come (e.g., Ecclesiastes Rabbah 2:1), although some of [the rabbis] were of the opinion that innovations would be made in the messianic era (e.g., Genesis Rabbah 98:9; Leviticus Rabbah 9:7).”

Both of these, along with other Jewish sources allow that the Messiah will alter the Torah. In Acts 6:13–14, where Stephen was accused of saying “that Yahshua from Natzeret will …change the customs Moshe handed down to us” met with swift reprisals. It was wrongly misunderstood that Stephen was counseling the abrogation of Torah, but in his defense Stephen did not say that the Torah had been abrogated, but instead upheld its sanctity and countercharged his accusers with disobeying it (Ac 7:1–53).

After the Sermon on the Mount it is easily seen how mechanical adherence to the Torah invites a legalistic perversion of the Torah. When Sha’ul was rumored to be “teaching all the Jews living among the Goyim to apostatize from Moshe, telling them not to have a b<rit-milah for their sons and not to follow the traditions,” he demonstrated publicly that the gossip was groundless (Ac 21:20–24). Then as now those that teach we are to follow YHVH’s Torah are easily misunderstood. Both Stephen and Sha’ul were speaking of Oral Torah that conflict with YHVH’s Word.

Pursuing this line of thought, the article continues,

“With the rise … of Christianity and Islam, which argued that particular injunctions of the Torah had been abrogated, the question of the eternity or ‘non-abrogatability’ of the Torah became urgent. Saadiah Gaon … interpreted the verses, ‘Remember ye the Torah of Moshe. Behold, I will send you Elijah … ’ (Malachi 3:22–24, as teaching that the Torah will hold valid until the prophet Elijah returns to herald the resurrection (Beliefs and Opinions 3:7).”

Luke, making use of this same passage in Malachi, wrote that Yochanan the Immerser came, “in the spirit and power of Elijah to ‘turn the hearts of fathers to their children’ ” (Lk 1:17); so that Yahshua could say that “Elijah has come already, and people did not recognize him” (Mt 17:12). In the light of these verses, the reasoning of this tenth-century sage is consistent with a Messianic Jewish approach.

But is it true that even “particular injunctions of the Torah,” as opposed to the Torah as a whole, were abrogated by the New Testament? Some branches of Christianity teach that the ethical Law remains, while the civil and ceremonial statutes have been done away with. For Gentiles this may seem a satisfactory solution to the problem of the Torah, but for Jewish believers it isn’t so simple as that. Some rules were transformed (change within sameness) by their fulfillment; this is a process found already in the Tanakh, for example, when the Tabernacle was superseded by the Temple. In the New Testament, Yashua’s own sacrificial death fulfilled the function of the Temple sacrifice for sin. Other rules were not abrogated, but were re-prioritized. G-d’s Festivals were given new significance. The Festival of Passover, for instance, where we plainly see Yahshua as the prototype and completion of the symbols of this festival. Several of the other festivals point directly to Him as well.

Maimonides, whose creed underlies the Yigdal hymn,

“ … contended that the eternity of the Torah is stated clearly in the Bible, particularly in Deuteronomy 13:1 (‘thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it’) and Deuteronomy 29:28 (‘the things that are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this Torah’).”

However, this sentiment is not universally upheld within the Jewish community for his opinion was criticized by two other prominent medieval Jewish philosophers, Chasdai Crescas and Joseph Albo. Similarly, the Kabbalah (the mystical stream within Orthodox Judaism) produced an alternative view that is most like the Christian antinomian view:

“In the 13th century Sefer ha-Temunah, a doctrine of cosmic cycles or shemittot (cf. Deuteronomy 15) was expounded, according to which creation is renewed every 7,000 years, at which times the letters of the Torah reassemble, and the Torah enters the new cycle bearing different words and meanings. Thus, while eternal in its unrevealed state, the Torah, in its manifestation in creation, is destined to be abrogated. This doctrine … was exploited by the [17th century Messianic pretender and] heretic Shabbetai Zevi and his followers, who [taught] that ‘the abrogation of the Torah is its fulfillment!’ ”

The Shabbeteans’ view was close to the erroneous Christian doctrine that takes Romans 10:4 to mean that Yahshua brought the Torah to an end.

In the 19th century, “Achad Ha-Am called for the Torah in the Heart to replace the Torah of Moshe and of the rabbis, which, having been written down, had, in his opinion, become rigid and ossified in the process of time.”

This notably anti-Christian apostle of cultural Zionism, alluding to the very passage in the Tanakh on which the Renewed refreshed Covenant is founded (Jeremiah 31:30–33, quoted in MJ 8:6–12), actually repeated the argument Christian theologians used for centuries against Judaism!

After noting that the ideologists of Reform Judaism considered “the abrogation of parts of the traditional Torah … not a heresy at all but … necessary for the progress of the Jewish religion,” the article concludes,

“[I]t is not entirely untenable that the main distinction between Orthodox Judaism and non-Orthodox Judaism [today] is that the latter rejects the literal interpretation of the ninth principle of Maimonides’ Creed that there will be no change in the Torah.”

Without apology I say that the Torah of Moshe and the Torah of the Messiah are the same. What is called “the perfect Torah, which gives freedom” (Ya 1:25, 2:12), “Kingdom Torah” (Ya 2:8), “the Torah … summed up in this one sentence: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself,’ is the same Torah that Moshe received and promulgated. Apparent changes are not abrogation’s, but applications of the eternal Torah to the new historical situation resulting from the Messiah’s first coming.

The central requirement of the Torah remains unchanged, “trust and faithfulness expressing themselves in love” (5:6). Yes, there is a Law of Love; Moshe brought it to G-d’s people, and what Yahshua said about it was, “If you love me, you will keep my commands” In Yn 14:15 we read: ⁵ For I have set you an example, so that you may do as I have done to you. ¹⁶ Yes, indeed! I tell you, a slave is not greater than his master, nor is an emissary greater than the one who sent him. ¹⁷ If you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them. And in   1Yn 3:22); Dear friends, if our hearts know nothing against us, we have confidence in approaching G-d; ²² then, whatever we ask for, we receive from him; because we are obeying his commands and doing the things that please him. And Yashua’s “commands” are God’s mitzvot, Torah to be obeyed.

If we consider that the United States constitution is “the same” as it was when it was promulgated, even though it has been amended many times, and specific provisions have even had their meaning reversed by court interpretation. Similar processes—normal legal processes—have taken place within Judaism. One can say, for example, that the Torah was “amended” in the Tanakh itself when Purim was made a required festival cneturies after Moshe. Yahshua himself honored this festival so apparently He accepted the halachah.  Rabbinic interpretation outlawed polygamy in most Jewish communities making the norm monogamy, instead polygamy. They turned the Sabbatical-year cancellation of debts by the prosbol of Hillel; see Deuteronomy 25:9–11, and so on. Many of these changes were beneficial, but were by no means the kind Yahshua condemned when he criticized “your tradition” (Mk 7:5–13).

What we have to fully understand in this morass of both Christian and Jewish thought on the Torah is that instead of abolishing torah or bringing a new Torah, Yahshua upholds the Torah’s true meaning. In so interpreting it, he “fulfilled” or better yet completed it, that is, he “filled it full” (Mt 5:17). He insisted that the Torah not be subverted by human tradition (Mk 7:1–23, that G-d’s original intent be preserved (Mt 19:3–9), that its spirit take precedence over its letter, and that obedience to it now implies both following him (Mt 19:21) and being guided by the Ruach HaKodesh (Holy Spirit). Sha’ul too made these same points (Ro 3:31; 7:6, 12, 14; 8:3; 2C 3:6; Ac 21:20–24). What the Torah is not, either by God’s intent or by its own nature, is legalism (2:16b, 3:23b). Rather, those who bear one another’s burdens, thereby loving their neighbors as themselves (5:14), are fulfilling the Torah’s true meaning, which the Messiah upholds and does not abrogate it in any way. This is not a new Torah, “not … a new command. On the contrary, it is an old command, which you have had from the beginning” (1 Yn 2:7).

Baruch haba B’Shem Adonai,

Rabbi Davis (R. Milchamah b. David)