THE PROBLEM WITH PAUL

Clarifying the Seemingly "Anti-Torah" Passages of Paul

For too long the scriptures of Rabbi Sha'ul (Apostle Paul) have been mistranslated or misunderstood. Here is a summarized explanation of a few of Paul's declarations that have been misunderstood, mistranslated, or just wrongly interpreted.

1. Doesn't this verse show that the Law of Moses was fading away? KJV 2 Cor. 3:13 "And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished"

Answer: No. The accurate translation is: "that the children of Yisrael would not keep looking, for that was a useless [katargeo] goal [telos]." In other words, there was nothing for Yisrael to gain by staring at Moses' "shining face" because their hearts were hardened.

The next verses Paul declares that Yisrael could not fully understand what the "old testament" was saying because of the spiritual veil over their hearts. He says that when one comes to know Messiah they then can better understand the Tanakh. His lesson has nothing to do with the Law [Torah] being taken away.

2. Doesn't this verse show that the Law of Commandments was abolished by Yeshua? KJV Eph 2:15 "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace."

Answer: No. The accurate translation is: "(When Yeshua was here) in physical form, he made useless [katargeo] the antagonism (between the two) caused by the opinions of men [dogma] concerning the Law of Commandments, so then through him one new man was made from the two.

Dogma means "opinions of men" put forth as ordinances. It is never used for G-d's Word in the New Testament. It is this dogma that causes the enmity between Jew and Gentile. Yeshua came to put away that enmity and bring into existence one new man that agreed through Him on the Commandments of YHVH.

Note: Katargeo is the Greek word which the KJV translates as abolished, but means "made useless." It is used in KJV 2 Tim 1:10 "But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel." However, we know death is not now abolished, but rather is made useless, or ineffective.

3. Didn't Paul say the Law was nailed to Yeshua's cross? KJV Col 2:14 "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross."

Answer: No. The accurate translation is: "(He) wiped away the documented opinions of men that were against us and adversely affecting us, and took them from our midst, (in a form) nailing them to His execution stake.

For this to refer to the Law of G-d, which is holy, righteous and good, would mean that the things of G-d are actually evil. Whatever was nailed to Yeshua's stake either has to be seen as evil and deserving of destruction, or as innocent and resurrected again with Yeshua. Therefore "the handwriting of ordinances" clearly refers to the false pretensions of men. (But if someone persists, then say, "Okay, if you believe the Law was nailed to the cross, then the Law of G-d was also resurrected with Messiah, and lives forever.)

In this context, concerning the opinions of men, Paul said in KJV Col 2: 16, "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath." Therefore, Paul was warning about the opinions of men concerning these things. He was NOT giving permission to transgress or dismiss them.

4. Didn't Paul say we are not to obey the Old Testament commandments anymore? As in, KJV Col 2:20,21 "Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances." (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?"

Answer: No. Once again, Paul is talking about dogma, the opinions of men, when the word ordinances is used here. And he repeats that notion in the phrase "commandments and doctrines of men." Paul is NOT talking about G-d's Word! G-d's Law is not the "rudiments of the world," neither does it cause one to "perish with the using."

In the next verse, Col 2:23, Paul shows the intent of his instruction, which is to head off the invention of more man made opinion about how we should act. "Which things have indeed a show of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honor to the satisfying of the flesh."

5. Doesn't the book of Hebrews say that the Old Covenant of Moses is taken away? KJV Hebrew 10:8,9 "When he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second."

Answer: No, it is transformed. The Former Covenant sacrifices of animals are no longer necessary because of the better sacrifice of Yeshua in His New Covenant. But the demands of a blood covenant in the Law is not taken away, therefore the Law of the Former Covenant is not taken away. We are required to have a blood covenant for sin now as formerly, and that commandment comes from the Former Covenant.

Also, it is in this same general passage that the writer of Hebrews quotes the Old Testament in verse 16, "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says YHVH, I will put my Law [Torah] into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them." Therefore, the sacrifice of Yeshua works to transfer even more effectively the Law of G-d into the devoted ones.

6. Paul said that we could eat whatever we want, so there is no more Kosher, right? KJV 1 Tim 4:1-5 "...giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils... forbidding to marry, and to abstain from food, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving. For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer."

Answer: No. Kosher Law is still G-d's Law, and Paul is actually confirming it here. Paul is warning against doctrines of demons, which say you can't have certain foods which G-d has made clear by His Word that it is good for food. Every creature is good and not to be refused IF it is made holy by the Word of G-d and prayer (thanksgiving). The Word of G-d has spoken on what is holy and not holy. That is what Kosher means, because it comes from the same root as kodesh, meaning holy.

7. But didn't Paul say it is up to us to decide what things we should eat and what day we should keep? KJV Romans 14:5,6 "One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks."

Answer: No. The context of this passage was a dispute over whether one may eat food that MAY or MAY NOT have been offered to idols. In those days food that was offered to idols was usually put out for sale to people on a certain day of the week. It could or could not have been offered to idols. Therefore, some believers would not buy food and eat it on those days (no refrigerators) just to make sure. However, some believers did, because they reasoned that since they didn't know for sure it was offered, it was not wrong. The instruction here does not address either Kosher or Sabbath day observance. It addresses the dispute over whether marketplace food, because of idolatry, should be purchased and eaten on a certain day of the week. It shows how sensitive the believers were to the possibility of food offered to idols. How much more sensitive should we be to what we eat, as to whether or not it is approved by the Word of G-d.

So, Paul is not the problem with these things, but looking at his words from an incomplete perspective is the problem, and promotes anti-Torah behavior.