A Sheep and a Kid
The age-old story of the Sheep and the Goats has been used to frighten countless generations. Did Jesus mean it to be used for that purpose? Or have we got it all wrong? Here it is in Young’s Literal Translation (revised).
‘And whenever the Son of Man may come in his glory, and all the holy messengers with him, then he shall sit upon a throne of his glory; and gathered together before him shall be all the nations, and he shall separate them from one another, as the shepherd does separate the sheep from the goats, and he shall set the sheep indeed on his right hand, and the goats on the left.
‘Then shall the king say to those on his right hand, Come you, the blessed of my Father, inherit the reign that has been prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I did hunger, and you gave me to eat; I did thirst, and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and you received me; naked, and you put around me; I was infirm, and you looked after me; in prison I was, and you came unto me.
‘Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when did we see you hungering, and we nourished? Or thirsting, and we gave to drink? And when did we see you a stranger, and we received? Or naked, and we put around? And when did we see you infirm, or in prison, and we came unto you?
‘And the king answering, shall say to them, Verily I say to you, Inasmuch as you did it to one of these my brethren — the least — to me you did it.
Then shall he say also to those on the left hand, Go you from me, the cursed, to the fire, the age-during, that has been prepared for the Devil and his messengers; for I did hunger, and you gave me not to eat; I did thirst, and you gave me not to drink; a stranger I was, and you did not receive me; naked, and you put not around me; infirm, and in prison, and you did not look after me.
‘Then shall they answer, they also, saying, Lord, when did we see you hungering, or thirsting, or a stranger, or naked, or infirm, or in prison, and we did not minister to you?
‘Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say to you, Inasmuch as you did it not to one of these, the least, you did it not to me. And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.’ (Matthew 25:31-46 RYLT-NT)
But what does it mean? Knowing the meaning of the words in this passage is, as always, vital. In this case, a little translational discrepancy creeps in at the very beginning, with the sheep and the goats. What does it really say?
and in front of Him shall be gathered all the nations. And He shall be severing them from one another even as a shepherd is severing the sheep from the kids. (Mat 25:32 CLV)
This is a little bit better, but even the Concordant Literal Version, in the interest of a simple one-word translation, renders “probaton” as “sheep”. If you want to be accurate, you should understand that probaton referred to any of a number of mature four-footed tame animals accustomed to graze. Jesus was not specifying sheep and goats, as we do when we say “sheep and goats.” He was referring to mature small grazing animals; small cattle, sheep, goats, and to baby (kid) goats. The distinction Jesus was making here was one of maturity, not species or type. We could call it the parable of the small tame four-footed grazing animals and the baby goats, but admittedly that lacks a certain something.
Another translational “problem” is the matter of eternity, eternal, and age-during. Most translations will render this as eternal, everlasting, never-ending, and so on. For a discussion of aion/aionios (which doesn’t in fact mean never-ending), see my posts: What’s in an Eternity? and Does an Eternity Have to be Forever? For now, I’ll just assume you’ve read them (or similar) and not explain that point further in this post.
This parable raises some questions, just in its basic foundations. In John 6, Jesus tells the people (when they ask) that the work the Father wishes them to do in order to inherit aionian (eternal) life is to believe on Him whom He has sent (the Him being Jesus). But here in this parable, Jesus says otherwise, or He seems to. Sheep are accepted based on what they have done. Baby goats are rejected based on what they have NOT done. This sounds like works-based salvation.
But here is another word we need a deeper understanding of — believe. As anyone who has ever struggled through a reading of the Amplified Bible will be able to recite by heart, the word believe doesn’t just signify a mental assent. It unfolds to “rely on, cling to, trust in, adhere to”. (I think I got that right . . .) And if you do those things, you’ll end up being like Jesus. And if you’re like Jesus, you’ll take care of other people who need you. You will know Him, and in knowing Him, you’ll know the Father. In one of Jesus’ last prayers before the Passion, He said, “. . . and this is everlasting (age abiding) life, that they may know You and Jesus the Messiah, whom You have sent.
Eternal life, as it turns out, is far more than unending years and length of days. It is about knowing God. In fact, it IS knowing God. Yes, yes — don’t worry — it does last forever, but honestly that’s not the point. Be real. Hasn’t there ever been a situation that made your life hell to the point you wished you didn’t have to deal with it any more? Who wants more life like that? Eternal life is the life of God in us. It is joy, peace, love, goodness. This is the kind of forever life a person could enjoy, well, forever. And we start living it the moment we forget about ourselves and surrender all to our Father. (Easy to say; hard to do, I know.)
And here’s where we come back to the sheep. You see, the sheep are mature. They’ve placed their own mortal lives on the brazen altar and felt them burn away. They’ve washed in the bronze laver and been made clean. They’ve been crushed into pure, ultra-refined olive oil and converted by the fire of the golden lampstand into light. They’ve been ground into fine flour and baked together into loaves to feed the hungry. They’ve been powdered into fragrant incense and gone up in clouds of sweet-smelling prayer to the Father. And they are ready to enter the Holy of Holies.
The baby goats, on the other hand . . . haven’t. More on that next time.
Baaaaaa
Haha sorry couldn’t resist, but thanks for making a blog post on this.
Annalisa, you funny girl!
Thanks for reading!
I think Jesus is talking to a different group, those who were
under the law.
In studying goats literally and sheep literally, only sheep
require a shepherd, while goats are able to manage themselves
without a shepherd.
We notice the goats REALLY keep score, really are aware of
what they did. They like points.
Sheep just ‘walk in the light’, and do whatever lies before them.
They don’t think about this.
So I see planning, almost ‘plotting’ whereas with sheep,
I see a RELATIONSHIP with Jesus and THAT is how they
know what to do, who to visit and so on.
Goats will be helping THEIR own, not other sheep.
Goats didn’t used to get along well with sheep.
Now we’ve got things going differently with raising the
kids, lambs together, petting zoos, but these were
what the people THEN knew about.
So I just don’t think everything is all about us.
Hi, 2FH
Thanks for reading — and commenting. It’s always encouraging to see people here and interacting. I really like what you have to say, and I think you make some excellent points. Great insights.
In my next post on this (which will go up tonight), I borrowed a picture from a blog where the lady was talking about the process of separating the sheep from the goats. She said that all that was needed for this was for the shepherd to walk through the flock and all the sheep would follow him out to better pasture. The goats would ignore him. I’m trying to get the link for you right now, but my internet is soooo slow (we’re on satellite, and while it’s better than dial up, lately it hasn’t been a LOT better . . .)
Actually, though, since the King is separating the sheep from the goats, it seems to me He must have had them together beforehand. And in Exodus, for the Passover lamb, the Israelites were told they could take the lamb from the sheep or the goats. I’m not sure they were in the habit of keeping them separate from one another. I hear these sorts of cultural tidbits too, and I notice that in one place one thing may be said, and in another place, another writer will assert the opposite. It’s hard to know which one to listen to.
But yes, those who are under the law, who are independent (in their own minds) and whose religious observances and fleshly effort seems to them to be sufficient, who care more about their own righteousness (filthy rags) than about their fellow humans . . . that’s pretty much my definition of immaturity.
How many atheists have you seen insisting that they’re good people and therefore as (or more) acceptable than those “evil religious people?” That’s law. And a lot of us Christians have made up our own law from the cloth of the NT writings.
Okay, here it is: http://speculativefictionweblog.wordpress.com/2012/05/09/sheep-from-goats/
I just recently learned something I found fascinating. Apparently in the catacombs there are a significant number of paintings that depict the Shepherd carrying on His shoulders — a baby goat. (Probably because it won’t follow Him on its own.) I find that very touching. Goats are born goats, and while they can be changed by our Lord, they aren’t responsible for having been born goats. And He takes care of them, too. He’s THAT good.
And no — everything is certainly not about us. Reading back over this, I see you’re right that I have the post a bit unbalanced. Hopefully it will even out a bit as we go along. But in case it doesn’t (I’ll have to look), let me go on the record as saying that all this is first and foremost about the Shepherd, who loves ALL His sheep.
When I hear about a person who has apparently died in his/her sins, my first impulse is always to offer Him my love and sympathy (odd, I know, but that’s how I feel). I may not know them, but He DOES, and loves them, and now they have this huge detour and only He knows how long before they’ll be ready to come (or be brought) home to Father’s arms.
Hey Cindy,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on this. I found it fascinating. I did a little digging myself after reading this and learned there is a word used solely for sheep that could have been used in place of probaton: ἀρήν or arén. So if the emphasis was to be two different kinds of animals, there were options available aside from using a word that is used for more than one kind of animal.
It is interesting “under the law” was brought up. I wanted to get your take on Paul’s delight on the law in Romans 7-8, Romans 3:31, and the many places that the law is synonymous with revealing sin, or lawlessness is indicated to be one aspect of sin. Since, after receiving salvation, we are to avoid sin, doesn’t it follow that serving the law in spirit is what is asked of us?
Peace,
- Paul
Hi, Paul
Thanks for reading, and thanks for looking that up. I had wondered whether there might be a word specific to sheep, but I obviously didn’t wonder hard enough.
I really appreciate your pointing that out!
I’m not sure what you mean by “serving the law in spirit.” It’s always hard to communicate about the law/grace in a way that allows everyone to understand one another accurately. I think that the way I would put it is that we rest in Christ. In Him is the fulfillment of the law, the Spirit, the bread of life (perhaps analogous of the tablets (broken and whole) of the testament, the golden jar of manna, Aaron’s rod that budded?)
So we are in Him and He in us and the law is written on our hearts so that we, by (new) nature do the things commanded in the law. And if we obey our old (dead) nature, then He will deal with us as with sons (and daughters). He will chastise us for our good and for the good of our brothers and sisters to teach us to listen to our new nature in Christ and thus we will naturally obey the perfect law of liberty. It is the law of liberty because to obey it means to follow our new, free, liberated nature — he whom the Son sets free shall be free indeed.
Blessings
Cindy
Cindy,
I will try to explain more thoroughly. I believe Jesus when he said he didn’t come to abolish or change the law, but to fulfill it. I consider his fulfilling of the law to be in the passages directly after he says this, where he extends the law given to Moses to include our hearts and desires.
I believe the law of God given to Moses is still good for revealing sin, although we are to serve in the newness of spirit rather than attempting to view it as hoops we must jump through to gain eternal life.
The covenant itself has changed. We enter through faith and the penalties for sin have been wiped away. However, this freedom we have does not allow us to ignore the law. It allows us to recognize the spiritual nature of it rather than pursuing it as empty rules. God will give us His Spirit to help us keep the law.
Imagine an orphanage where a list of chores and a code of conduct were on the wall. The children were told if they disobeyed, they would suffer. A master was placed over them, and of course no child could ever do what was correct the whole time. Then Christ came, kicked out the old master, adopted all the children, and put “Be a Family” above the rules. There was no punishment anymore once they were a part of the family, but they understood this was concerning how to be a family and was what their Father wanted and He would help them keep it.
As an example for all of this, I don’t see a distinction between law and no law in the Bible (or two different sets of laws), such as in Romans. I see the emphasis to be how we serve God’s law. I find “end” in Romans 10:4 to be an incorrect translation, where “aim” or “goal” would be more correct.
There’s a lot more, but I will stop here to see your response.
Peace,
- Paul
Ah, okay — that makes perfect sense. Beautifully put!
Aside from one little point, I agree with you completely. And I’m sure you won’t disagree with my point — you just didn’t mention it. Part of being a family with a father is that the Father chastises His children as He deems necessary for their good. If He chastises you, He deals with you as sons; the Father chastises every son He receives.
I suspect that “aim” or “goal” was the intent of the KJV translators (end often meant that, once upon a time), and that’s the way I read it even as translated. Here’s another interesting translation. I’m not sure how I feel about it, but it bears thinking about:
For Christ is the consummation of law for righteousness to everyone who is believing. (Rom 10:4 CLV)
Blessings!
Cindy
Cindy,
I was not expecting this. I’m pleasantly surprised. Do you observe the Sabbath on Saturday? Do you not eat pork or shellfish?
Peace,
- Paul
Knowing what GOATS are like, their personality did not scare me.
GOATS scare me. GOAT like people are ones to get away from.
They do a lot of ‘butting’, ‘yes, but’, and don’t get into ‘one accord’
often.
I come to the bible as a child, not knowing, letting Jesus teach me,
BELIEVING what He said, not having to put a spin on His word
which is what I see here.
I think people would only be frightened if they thought they
were goats. So it’s good to know the difference between these
two, and know what they were like in Jesus’ time in Israel.
Big difference. Sheep aren’t cared for today like they were in Israel
by many people. Goats then were independent, needed no one,
certainly as people did not need a Savior.
I find it sad when people start becoming ‘better’ than Yehoshua,
which is the name of Jesus when it is researched in Strong’s.
Paul, dear brother — I’m afraid I will disappoint you there.
No, we do not observe the Sabbath on Saturday in particular. Every day is Holiness Unto the Lord, the way we see it, and Jesus is our Sabbath rest.
And yes, we eat pork and shellfish — all of us, as far as I know. Are you a Seventh Day Adventist? (Good brothers and sisters — no problems there.) As Gentiles, I guess we don’t see that we’ve been commanded to obey Jewish ceremonial laws and dietary restrictions. Plus, to obey the entire 600+ commandments would be nearly, if not outright, impossible and in some cases even undesirable today.
So yes . . . if that’s what you mean by keeping the law, I guess we don’t qualify. I thought you meant more along the lines of loving one another and so fulfilling the law of Christ, etc. — although I know that 7th Day certainly does this as well.
Blessings
Cindy
I think it’s funny how ALL the disciples were Jews!! and how Sabbath was
uppermost to them, and how Jesus said ‘I am LORD also of the Sabbath’.
Only Jesus could have changed this, and it precedes the Law, and
only became part of the Law, well you know the people did everything
to just get back into business, to not have to worship.
So it had to become part of the Law. But it is in the bible prior
to the Law.
I never keep LAWS because that was good for a people,
but I want to follow what was outlined from Genesis.
Some might not know that there is NO reason for the 7 days
EXCEPT for the Sabbath. If you take 7 equal denomination coins,
say pennies, they touch perfectly, one in the center and 6 surrounding
the rest.
Again, I came to see what to do not to change what it said.
Now, I know that God is big, and He knows what gentiles can
and cannot do.
But Paul worshipped on Sabbath also, …of COURSE he did…a Pharisee!!
and if it had changed, all the disciples, especially Jesus were gutsy
enough to speak up. They did not.
This was changed into the day of the Sun…it says it right there,
Sun-day which was a pagan day.
I think this is not making a dent in anyone’s thinking.
But since I do love that time set aside by Theos from Genesis,
and going right through into the Millenium (see Isaiah), it is
a privilege to understand it and worship Jesus then.
As I said, because so few do this, and if they do, they do so many
things that are NOT in the bible, or they deny things in the bible,
that I usually don’t comment.
But this time I did.
But it does change many things for sure.
Joy
Cindy,
I’m simply Christian. I try to avoid any further label–you know, dissensions and factions and all that. I have been attending a Messianic Jewish service the past few months because I love the fellowship and communal worship, but still have a hard time with some of their traditions. I don’t have a problem with the tassels or dancing (I quite enjoy the dancing!), but would rather not call anyone “Rabbi” or wear a cap.
Anyway, so with this in mind, what are your thoughts on Paul’s delight on the law in Romans 7-8, Romans 3:31, and the many places that the law is synonymous with revealing sin, or lawlessness is indicated to be one aspect of sin. Since, after receiving salvation, we are to avoid sin, doesn’t it follow that serving the law in spirit is what is asked of us?
I have heard “Jesus is our Sabbath rest” before but haven’t looked too heavily into it until now. I’ve read Hebrews 3-4 a couple of times last night and today, but I’m not seeing it. After reading a few webpages that tried to explain it, I still don’t understand how one gets from Jesus being a rest from works for salvation to no longer taking a day from labor for God. To me, it is like saying because God is our spiritual Father and we no longer work for salvation, we are to no longer honor our biological parents. Or because we no longer work for salvation and God has given us this, we are to no longer give to others.
If anything, this truth concerning our rest from works for salvation would seem to make the Sabbath rest even more special and relevant as we celebrate the salvation we have in Jesus!
Colossians 2:16-17 is mentioned some places as a reason to not keep it. Personally, I read that passage as a reason to continue to keep it. In the context, it seems like a festive contrast to the self-abasement others are teaching. The literal translations really help bring this out.
Peace,
- Paul
Hi, Paul
I’ll look into this some more and read your scriptures and pray/commune with Father about it. I wouldn’t want to be pig-headed about it and later find that you were right and it was God’s grace to have you point this out to me.
My basic understanding that special feast days and Sabbaths comes from Paul’s statements something like this . . . let no one condemn/enslave you regarding a new moon or a feast day or a Sabbath, etc. (I’m probably misquoting this — it may be in Galatians, but I’m not sure just now.) I’m sure you recognize the scripture, though.
Anyway, I’ll get back to you on this. My sweet husband wants to go to town.
Blessings, Cindy
Cindy,
Ah, yes, that is Colossians 2:16. Here is Young’s Literal translation: “Let no one, then, judge you in eating or in drinking, or in respect of a feast, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths,”
I can see two legitimate interpretations of this verse, and they are complete opposites. Either it is an encouragement to continue refraining from these things, or it is an encouragement to continue doing these things. I had to read it a bunch of times before I could even grasp the possibility that it could be interpreted differently than I had been originally taught. Consider this: I, as someone that keeps feasts and sabbaths, could use this verse to give me encouragement to not let other people judge me in these matters. Does that make sense?
So if we have two possible interpretations, we have to decide if the danger is Judaizers teaching works theology or pagans teaching self-abasement.
Taking a look at the verses where he mentions the opposing, bad teachings: “Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ.” Philosophy, empty deceit, and tradition of men could probably apply to either camp, generally speaking. However, “basic principles of the world” doesn’t really strike me as how Paul typically describes Judaism or being “under the law”.
There is a mention of circumcision in a few verses, but it seems to be more about initiation into Christ than a conflict of teaching. It seems to be about establishing God’s power to redeem even those who were uncircumcised, and His triumph over “principalities and powers”. This phrase was first brought up in Col 1:16: “For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers.” There seems to be repeated emphasis of God being greater than other powers. Similar language is used, and with greater detail, in Ephesians 1:21-2:3. In both letters I believe he is speaking of pagan, foreign gods.
Then we get to the verses 18-23 which talk poorly of “delighting in humble-mindedness,” “Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,” and “neglecting of body.” This is a pretty clear indication of the problem teaching: religious self-deprivation (among other things).
So v16, in light of this, appears to me to be encouragement to enjoy eating and drinking and the festivals rather than engaging in self-abasement as taught by followers of foreign gods.
Please let me know if you have any questions or insights. I am eager to learn as well.
Peace,
- Paul
Oh yes . . . I did miss the bit about Colossians. It seems to me that this entire letter is speaking of (probably) some heresy involving angel worship or something similar although I guess people disagree about what the heresy actually was.
But yes, having read it in context, I agree that Paul is probably talking about Pagan feast days. However, it has always looked to me as though Paul is saying, “He who keeps the day keeps it unto the Lord and He who does not keep it, does not keep it — unto the Lord. In other words, do as you think God would have you do.
I like the idea of keeping the feasts, not as a requirement, but as a joyful celebration, and I see nothing wrong with doing the same with the weekly Sabbath.
//Anyway, so with this in mind, what are your thoughts on Paul’s delight on the law in Romans 7-8, Romans 3:31, and the many places that the law is synonymous with revealing sin, or lawlessness is indicated to be one aspect of sin. Since, after receiving salvation, we are to avoid sin, doesn’t it follow that serving the law in spirit is what is asked of us?//
I wouldn’t disagree with this, but I see this as asking us to observe the perfect law of liberty, which is love. And while I do love Romans (and have a particular soft spot for ch 8), I’d cite Ro 7 more as a passage regarding why we are not under the Mosaic law. But here are some more passages n Romans. You can answer any of them you like — I wouldn’t expect you to answer all (or any, for that matter), but think about them if you get a chance to look through them:
Ro 2:14-15, 25-27, 3:19-22, 28, 31, 4:13-15, 7:1-6, 14:6.
The whole book of Romans talks heavily about law (as I’m sure you’re aware), and yes — I’ve left off the ones that don’t support my particular stance, but that doesn’t mean I think they contradict it. If I thought that, I’d bring them out.
Okay, the idea of resting from our own works in Christ. To me, this is what Jesus being the Sabbath means. While, as you point out, I don’t think it’s wrong to keep the Sabbath as the Jewish Sabbath or simply as a day of rest and focus on God, I do think we’re asked to pray without ceasing (focus on Him always), and that we’re called to MORE than keeping one day a week.
Most mornings I spend an hour or so in communion with God. I don’t say this to brag; it’s just what I’m blessed to be able to do, since my husband subsidizes my art “career”.
However, I believe that we, as followers of Jesus, do need to spend time with Father just as Jesus did, and if we don’t do this, we won’t learn to hear the Spirit and know what it is we’re to do. We won’t know the Shepherd’s voice. All day I am talking to Him, listening to Him, thanking Him for blessings, asking Him for help. He really is my Sabbath rest. But again, I spend most of my time alone whether working or resting, so this is pretty easy for me.
Others MAY need to take a day specially just to focus on God, if they have a lot of distractions, impossibly full schedule, etc. But even if they do choose to do this, I think that we all need to learn to pray without ceasing and to rest in Him continually. Anyone who doesn’t do this to at least some extent is very sadly missing out.
I’ve also heard the argument that we still consider the keeping of the rest of the ten commandments to be important; why not the Sabbath? But really, I think an argument can be made that we have (or Jesus has) significantly altered all of the commandments. It isn’t enough just to have no other gods, not take His name in vain — we must worship in Spirit and in truth, for the Father seeks such to worship Him. We do not only love God, but we die to ourselves and live only by His life.
We love our neighbor as we love ourselves, and we also love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us. We not only honor our father and mother, but we honor all people. Not only do we refrain from stealing, bearing false witness, destroying relationships, and envying our neighbors; we actively work for their good, and also for the good of those who are not our neighbors but our persecutors.
There are a good generous handful of scriptures declaring that for Christ followers, the applicable law is not the law of Moses, but rather the law of love.
So why does the Sabbath alone get docked from the Ten? Well — it doesn’t actually. Yes, in practice it often DOES, alas, but let’s face it; in practice so do many of the other laws. In Christ, all these laws are expanded, including the Sabbath. In the flesh, too many times we do not love God; we do have other gods; we do take His name in vain when we should be in fact bearing and glorifying it by His life shining through us; we do not only not sit on our hands all Sabbath-day, but we don’t take any other time to seek Him, either. Far from loving our neighbor and treating him/her well, we victimize, disregard and hold our neighbors in contempt and we do not work for their good. Forget the part about enemies. I’m sure Jesus didn’t mean THAT! :O
So . . . I’m going to read the rest of what you wrote again, and then I’ll talk some MORE! (but don’t feel you have to read it all at once)
Hey Cindy, thanks for the thoughtful reply.
I’d cite Ro 7 more as a passage regarding why we are not under the Mosaic law.
When you say “not under the Mosaic law” you mean the law does not apply to us, correct? Romans 7, to me, doesn’t talk about two sets of laws. And since almost every time it talks about not serving the law, it also talks about serving the law, so the idea that the law doesn’t apply at all doesn’t seem to match what is being said. What the emphasis seems to me to be is how we serve the law. When Paul says the law is holy, righteous, good, and spiritual, it appears that he’s talking about the same Mosaic law, not a new set of laws. Personally, I don’t care for the phrase “Mosaic law.” I think it creates a distinction that isn’t stressed in the scriptures. God shares His law. While our understanding of God’s law changes over time, for better or worse, and at times distinctions arise in how we attempt to keep God’s law, at its core there is only one law.
I suppose I should explain my understanding of “under the law.” It is largely based on Romans. Since Romans 7-8 in particular contrast serving the law carnally in the flesh and members versus serving spiritually with the mind and inward man, I view being “under the law” as trying to keep the law legalistically as an arbitrary set of rules to earn salvation. This is in contrast to voluntarily serving the law with love, knowing your salvation is already secured, and attempting to understand and recognize that the manner with which you observe the laws is important. The former is about looking for ways to technically keep the laws without caring about the intent or spirit of each law. The latter is more concerned with what is pleasing to our Father and allowing ourselves to go above and beyond what is explicitly written for each law.
The problem with being “under the law” from this viewpoint is that you become enslaved to a very narrow, very strict interpretation. There are many examples of this in the gospels. In Mat 23:23 Jesus points out how the Pharisees put out the effort to tithe even from their herbs, but missed the weightier matters of the law like justice and mercy and faith. They were trapped in a worldly view of the law instead of a spiritual view of the law. Through death to the world we are able to live spiritually and follow the law as God intends and as Jesus taught.
I’d like to address some of the verses you mention.
Ro 2:14-15: This appears to be a continuation of the previous thought. Those that sin without the law will perish without reference to it, yet those with the law that sin will be judged according to the law. And those nations that don’t have the law yet by nature keep it will be judged by their conscience. Personally, I am grateful to God that I have the Bible and His Spirit, and do not have to depend on nature to keep the law. I was not a very good person in my youth.
Ro 2:25-27: v26 seems to support keeping the law, but I think your point is the “by nature” in v27. Some translations interpret that as meaning “physically uncircumcised.” Either way, the point seems to be more of the same: judgement according to the law. I would have a hard time pulling weighty theological ideas from these verses aside from the general point being made about judgement, which started in chapter 1.
Ro 3:19-22, 28, 31: Wonderful is our God! Yes, these verses are great! Continuing from his theme of judgement he here makes a bold statement: Righteousness is a gift from God through faith in Jesus! Additionally, all have sinned, the law provides knowledge of this sin, and yet though we attain righteousness through faith this does not do away with the law. Rather, this provides the means with which we can finally fulfill the law and avoid sin.
Ro 4:13-15: To support his argument about righteousness, Paul here references Abraham and points out how it was through faith, not works of the law, that he was declared righteous. Specifically, we are heirs of righteousness through faith, not heirs of punishment through the law (as previously pointed out: all have sinned and will be judged).
Ro 7:1-6: Some people get caught up in this analogy of one husband dying and joining with another. They interpret this to mean the “Mosaic law” dies and we are joined the “law of Christ.” But that isn’t what Paul says here. He doesn’t distinguish between different laws. He does distinguish between serving in spirit versus serving the letter. Throughout the rest of Romans 7 and into Romans 8, Paul many times says that serving the law in a worldly way is bad, yet serving the law spiritually is good. The same law can either be of sin or of God, depending entirely on how you observe it.
As to what the analogy is about, it appears to be saying that through Jesus’ death we are freed from the jurisdiction of the law. Not only that, but Jesus was resurrected and we are now free to bind ourselves to him to produce spiritual fruit (could possible read spiritual offspring into this). Paul then goes on to explain that we do this through spiritual observance of the law.
Ro 14:6: In chapter 13 Paul talked about fulfilling the law. Considering how chapter 14 transitions in v1, and immediately follows talking about vegetarians, it would seem that this is concerning debatable matters, possibly those that aren’t a part of the law. Chapter 15 continues talking about receiving one another and how the Gentiles will glorify God.
I don’t think 14:5-6 are talking about the Sabbath. Every day alike? It doesn’t seem like Paul would be casually suggesting it is okay to never work. In fact, he earnestly teaches against this in 2 Thessalonians 3. I think the idea that this refers to the Sabbath stems from a misunderstanding of what the Sabbath is, and how the Bible teaches to observe it.
I find it wonderful that you are able to continually pray, praise, worship, and seek after God throughout the day. I agree that we all need this, as much as we can get. The world is heavy, and weighs down the spirit when we are unable to rest in Him. Daniel consistently prayed three times a day, most likely during the three times of the daily sacrifice.
I think you and I agree on this matter: we must spend time every day in communion. Praying without ceasing is a wonderful ideal, but as most work requires some measure of our attention on worldly matters, it can be difficult to attain this. However, this is in addition to keeping the Sabbath. When Jesus expanded the law, he did not do away with the law.
In some ways you could say it was a re-organizing of the law rather than an alteration. The command to love your neighbor as yourself? Lev 19:18. Doing good for your enemy? Exd 23:4-5. The principles of love and justice are there from the beginning. They had just become twisted and entangled by legalism and the world. Paul’s writings do make clear that some things did change: entering the covenant by circumcision of the heart through grace and faith in Jesus and not through circumcision of the flesh; atonement of sins through the sacrifice of the Messiah and repentance; and observing God’s law in a spiritual way rather than carnally as the Pharisees were.
There are a good generous handful of scriptures declaring that for Christ followers, the applicable law is not the law of Moses, but rather the law of love.
It is my understanding that these scriptures are saying we must use love to fulfill God’s law (some of which was written by Moses). The emphasis being on how we are to observe God’s law, not that there are two different sets of laws.
I hope this message finds you well, sister.
Love and peace to you,
Paul
Hi, Paul
It’s so funny that we see these passages so very differently. You see keep the law in spirit, but I see that the law is love and can only be kept in spirit, and this has little to do with the individual precepts.
You see keep a holy day, but I see all days are holiness unto the Lord. Keep them ALL. Yes, really — don’t just say we keep them all but actually factually keep them all. Be in His presence all the time to the best we can learn how to do it, and live by His life.
You see a handful of dietary restrictions and I see all foods are clean (except maybe some of those interesting colloquial specialty dishes created by people who had to have been starving to death.)
But we both see Jesus, the salvation of our sins and the completion and fulfillment of the law. We could discuss this back and forth until the ages of the ages, but Jesus will straighten both of us out when the time comes, I don’t doubt.
Blessings to you, Brother
Cindy
Cindy,
I have appreciated the back-and-forth as I really enjoy talking about God and the Bible, both with people who share my beliefs and those that challenge my interpretations.
I hope you don’t mind if leave you with some last thoughts here.
To me, we are baptized in the name of Christ and are of His body. Therefore, we should place our highest priority upon His words and teachings.
The books of Matthew, Mark, John, and Luke+Acts were each likely written as a complete, independent book originally. It was only later that they were gathered together and bound as a single volume. It would seem that the fundamental, core messages of our Messiah should be contained in more than one book and these messages should be given the most weight by us. They should be central to our theology, and far, far above everything else.
Most of the letters were addressed and tailored to specific congregations. Many carry recurring themes, and these too should be noted and emphasized by us. Important concepts are often repeated.
Lastly, concerning the apostle Paul’s writing style, for a long time some of it confused me. But it became clearer when I began to write outlines of his letters. When I began to try to summarize groups of verses and pull out his overarching primary emphasis, I realized that Paul would frequently make a point, and then thoroughly explain that point over and over and over from many different angles and rephrasing his argument with different words time after time.
This allows me to recognize what Paul considers important, and place less priority on vague rationales derived from his examples.
I also noticed that he often revisits analogies within the same letter, and sometimes reuses them in other letters. But my memory isn’t the best, and I easily lose track of his train of thought within his examples without the outline (although a computer search helps a lot too).
His letters almost always have a very deliberate flow/succession/arc to them. He tells a story, building on previous pages. If I find a verse that didn’t seem to fit with the surrounding text, I can usually dig into the Greek and discover the source of my misunderstanding.
I’m not suggesting writing outlines of all the letters, but you may want to try one to see if it helps you understand Paul’s writing style. Now I almost always read a couple of chapters before, and a couple of chapters after a verse to get a feel for the context.
Peace and love,
- Paul
P.S. Some literary structures to look for in the Bible, particularly in Paul’s writings:
http://www.bible-discernments.com/joshua/whatisachiasm.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antithetic_parallelism
Hi, Paul
Thanks so much for the link! I’ll definitely check that out. I only discovered a few years ago some of the hints to Paul’s literary structure, and I absolutely love that sort of thing. It makes it so much easier to understand not only Paul’s writings, but large portions of scripture, both OT and NT.
I did have one college lit class, but while I learned a lot from it, it was rudimentary since I was going for an AS degree in nursing rather than anything philosophical or academic. If you can recommend any sources of that kind, I’ll always be grateful.
I agree with you about analyzing Paul’s writings, btw. I did do a study of 1 Cor similar to what you describe, and that was where I discovered that in order to read Paul (or any of the other scriptural writers) in context, you really needed to read and keep in mind the whole epistle/book.
But the more I study the Bible, the more I see that it’s not enough to keep the book in context — you have to keep the entire NT and OT in mind.
Howsomever, I’ve been wanting to/meaning to do such a study of Romans in particular, and will get to that as the Lord prods me. Sometimes it takes quite a lot of prodding, alas, but it would definitely help me with Romans as it’s a little hard to follow otherwise.
BTW, I’m sorry your comments didn’t post straight-away, and not quite sure why that happened. Maybe you used a different e-mail address or server or something. At any rate, I wanted to make sure you know that I didn’t block you out.
Blessings, Cindy
Hello, Joy (glad to finally know your name!)
I’m sorry that this seems to have offended you, although I’m not sure I’m understanding what you’re trying to say. Are you offended by people who don’t keep the Jewish Sabbath? Or is it the word study re: sheep and goats (or both)?
Sister, I have no need to persuade you that you’re wrong (or right) about anything. Father will take care of that (for you or for me) as He deems necessary, through His Holy Spirit. This blog is just a record of my own spiritual journey and to share my current point of view with those who are interested. Please don’t take from this that I expect you to change any of your views and follow mine. That’s between you and the Lord (or Yehoshua, if you prefer).
It does interest me though, that many people who do keep the Jewish Sabbath as a special day appear to me to feel very angry that others do not. Can’t Father deal with each of us as He sees fit? I assure you before God this moment, that I am ready to hear Him on this topic and any other subject on which He desires to change my mind and behavior. I listen to brothers and sisters as well, of course, but ultimately it’s down to Him. And He hasn’t convicted me that Sabbath-keeping is something He desires or requires me to do in the old way.
So how exactly do you, personally, keep Sabbath? I’ve often wondered this — how modern-day Christians who do choose to keep Sabbath, keep it. It should be sundown Friday to Sundown Saturday (sundown in Jerusalem, of course). What do you do/not do? Do you follow the Talmud on this, or do you work it out for yourselves or according to the practice of your own particular church?
And do you also keep all of the other scriptural feast days? If so, I’d love to know what that looks like — and if you belong do a denomination, I’d be interested to know which it is. One of our members still attends his parents’ church on Sunday mornings (and meets with us on Sunday evenings), and they keep all the feast days. Fascinating stuff and so richly symbolic. I’d like to see our group keep the fall feasts this year. I think we’d learn a lot.
Love, Cindy
“how modern-day Christians who do choose to keep Sabbath, keep it”
I can’t speak for everyone, but for me the meaning and symbolism are very important to understand how to keep it. As with everything we do, if we do it begrudgingly or carnal-mindedly (I may have just made up a word), we will always fail to do it fully [1 Corin 13:3]. So while I can explain some aspects what I do, I would prefer to take a moment to share what it means to me and why I do it.
The Sabbath is first mentioned in the Bible during the retrieval of manna in the desert, before the law was given to Moses on tablets (makes me think the law existed before that, as in Genesis 26:5). Anyway, God would give manna for six days, with twice as much the day before the Sabbath. The seventh day was to be a rest from gathering manna.
More details are given in Exodus 20: “For [in] six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that [is] in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.” It is symbolic of God’s work and rest. We’re instructed to keep it holy and to do no work. It is blessed over other days.
Exodus 31: “a sign between Me and you throughout your generations, that [you] may know that I [am] the LORD who sanctifies you.” So it is a sign that the God who created the world in six days is our God, forever. “to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations [as] a perpetual covenant.” Even more than solely a sign, it is also a perpetual covenant. Punishment for breaking it was death. So God viewed it very seriously.
Skipping forward a bit we find a story in Nehemiah 13 where the Levites are asked to help guard the gate to keep people from breaking the Sabbath by preventing merchants and sellers from entering the city. He even warns them to stop coming to the gates.
Isaiah 56 presents some contrast, “Who keeps from defiling the Sabbath, And keeps his hand from doing any evil” and “the sons of the foreigner who join themselves to the LORD, to serve Him, And to love the name of the LORD, to be His servants–Everyone who keeps from defiling the Sabbath, And holds fast My covenant” It seems like a pretty big deal.
Isaiah 58: “If you turn away your foot from the Sabbath, [From] doing your pleasure on My holy day, And call the Sabbath a delight, The holy [day] of the LORD honorable, And shall honor Him, not doing your own ways, Nor finding your own pleasure, Nor speaking [your own] words, Then you shall delight yourself in the LORD; And I will cause you to ride on the high hills of the earth, And feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father. ” The Septuagint has “Nor utter a word in anger from thy mouth” instead of “nor speaking words”, which makes more sense. These verses present some more background on how to observe it. It is a day where we are not to pursue our own pleasure, and even our words matter. We are to delight in God.
Jeremiah 17 presents some positives for keeping it, and negatives for not: “I will kindle a fire in its gates, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem, and it shall not be quenched” The Sabbaths again seem really important. Throughout Ezekiel the Sabbaths are mentioned right alongside keeping God’s statutes and judgements.
But we are not to be dogmatic about it. Jesus made it clear that it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath. He gives examples of pulling an animal out of a ditch on the Sabbath, and says people are more valuable than animals. He mentions “saving life” and healed a lot on the Sabbath.
I have heard some people say that because the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath, we can do whatever we want on the Sabbath. To me, based on what is posted above, this seems like a carnal way of looking at things; trying to use loopholes, technicalities, or contrived reasoning to serve ourselves. The significance of the Sabbath seems undeniable to me. On the seventh day of the week, God wants our undivided, directed attention.
I hope this finds you well. May God give you peace and joy this day.
Peace,
- Paul
Everything that you say here is good, Paul — however (you saw that coming, I know — and I really hate disagreeing with people, especially gentle and sincere brothers and sisters) I see the NT saying loud and clear that we are to refrain from speaking our own words and doing our own things always. Jesus said He never did anything He didn’t see the Father doing.
He lived as a man, by the power of the Holy Spirit and directed by the Father. Just as He did, as our example, we are to live by the power of the Spirit, directed by our Rabbi Jesus. I just don’t hear Him telling me in my Spirit that this is something for me to do today. And there are a lot of places in the NT that say things such as the old law passing away with the old priesthood and a new law being established (the law of love).
Now in the requirement of the law we spend one day a week with our Father, but in the law of love, we walk with Him constantly (as Jesus did).
What’s more, the edict passed to Paul regarding the Gentile Christians was that they should abstain from meat sacrificed to animals, strangled, or from consuming blood, and that they should not practice sexual immorality. No mention at all of the Sabbath. While the Jews were known throughout the empire for keeping the Sabbath, Paul does not command the churches to keep Sabbath in any of his extant letters. Neither do Peter, Jude, James, John, the writer of Hebrews, Luke, or anyone else I may have forgotten.
The lack of such a commandment if it involved the Jews primarily would be completely natural. Why command them to do what they were most likely already doing? But to the Gentiles, this was not yet a habit. Maybe the “godly Gentiles” kept Sabbath, but these did not comprise the whole of the new church, nor even probably the majority of it. Yet there is no mention of the importance of Sabbath keeping anywhere in the Epistles. The nations in Revelation aren’t chided for not keeping Sabbath, either, though this failure in the Jews (particularly the Sabbaths of the land) was a significant factor in their having been sent to exile.
Either all the churches consistently and faithfully kept the Sabbath or else this wasn’t even on the radar. Otherwise, one would certainly expect it to have been mentioned at least a handful of times, yet there is nothing.
There is no justification for anyone to judge those who do choose to keep the day unto the Lord. And there is also no justification for judging those who do not keep it (also unto the Lord).
I still have some sorting to do, to sort this out. I found a lot of scriptures, and I wrote down the references but not what they were about — however I’ll list them here in case you’d like to have a look:
Mt 7:12, 22:36-40, Gal 3-6, Lk 10:25-28, (all the Romans ones I mentioned before), Hb 7:12, 10:1, Jas 1:25, 2:8-12, Jn 1:17, Eph 2:15, 1 Ti 1:9-11, Tit 3:9
Hi, Paul
I haven’t forgotten you — we’ve had guests all week. No time to read this just now, but I’ll be able to this evening after the church leaves.
Talk to you then,
Cindy
Sabbath actually started in Genesis, when Yehoshua, the LORD ‘rested’.
I suspect while food LAWS are not something for us today,
that we weren’t meant to eat what the bible called ‘unclean’.
Yet I’m not too sure about all that, and while I DON’T eat
much ‘unclean’, I don’t NOT eat it, if you see this difference.
It would be interesting to know more about health in these
areas. I know, for example, that animals are seriously abused
today, especially pigs who actually try to commit suicide,
so horrible it is.
But Sabbath, Jesus talked about, so I do this, because it’s
a blessing to me. I KNEW it as soon as I heard about it that
this was right.
I knew it because the world kept SUNday…the day of the sun.
I speak just our own experience and the few people we know
who do this. We might have belonged to the 7th day Pentecostal
but they don’t have one here, so a sunday church is fine.
A day and 2 hours on sunday doesn’t hurt at all.
I don’t feel any need to defend sabbath or my belief in this,
but my love of doing this is why I wrote this. We do, all of us,
have THINGS to do, things that are ‘in the world’, so having
that period when I DON’T do those things is healing.
I can’t imagine the Sabbath being grievous.
I find sunday grievous.
The first day of the week is to work, not to rest.
The 7th day, given by the Lord, continued in the NT and
always, found in Isaiah, it’s part of my liberty in Christ,
because we need spiritual rest, not just sleep, not just
hearing someone ‘talk’ which to me is very passive.
The law actually embraces ‘Honor thy father and thy mother’.
Jesus is the fulfilment of that law, and He extended it,
didn’t shorten it.
But it’s not a set of rules, but a lifestyle, a way that leads
one into life, into beauty.
What the world is not what I do.
The world sleeps in, and often has ‘sunday’ off.
I’m glad I’m not a part of the world.
The sabbath is a sign, and it shows I am a spiritual Jew,
grafted into Abraham. But, regardless of what it is,
it is my privilege to worship Jesus, hailing me way back
to the garden where it all went wrong.
But if it doesn’t speak to the heart, then it cannot be.
I think that’s great, Sis. God has blessed you through it, and clearly He’s led you to do this. If you’d like to see my study on this (such as it is), look through my replies to Paul. Sorry they’re so long. I won’t rehash any of the things I said to him here.
Like you, I do more or less keep the food laws just because most of the forbidden foods are things I don’t usually eat — but of course, if you keep part of the law, you’re obligated for all of it (check the verses I listed for Paul — that’s in there somewhere; probably in Galatians).
I honestly don’t put a lot of stock in the names of the days of the week. They are what they are, and we didn’t name them. You could skip our weekday names and find out the Hebrew names and use them if you want to — might be fun. The parents of one of our brothers actually did that when all the kids were small for a few years, because they didn’t want to use the names of (mostly) Norse gods to name their weekdays. It didn’t end up working out for them, though. They eventually went back to the names everyone else knew.
As I said, though, it’s great that you keep Sabbath and that Father told you to, and that it’s a blessing to you. If He tells me the same, I’ll absolutely keep it too.
Love, Cindy