Ever since the birth of the Church and the New Testament was written, so many questions had been raised by the believers regarding the laws and prophesies in the Old Testament. Many churches got split and various denominations sprouted out over the stand on certain law or doctrine. Unity which Christ spoke of and emphasized on sadly got chipped and chopped off by mere petty disagreement and prideful decisions.
Even in Paul's days, confusion rose when Paul tried to point to the heart of Christ rather than to the laws and rituals the people were accustomed to. When he gave more importance to the circumcision of heart rather than the circumcision of foreskin, his teaching were either misunderstood, misinterpreted or opposed by many who heard him. His undertaking of spreading the gospel among Gentiles were met with resistance by law abiding Jews of that time. Paul's journey was a rocky one and his message was confusing to many because they failed to see was trying to point to-the ultimate fulfillment of the Mosaic Law in Christ.
Paul defends himself telling the churches in Corinth and Galatia, how drenched he was in Judaism as a Pharisee and how zealous he was for the tradition of his fathers until he met Christ on his way to Damascus.
Once transformed by Christ and was on a journey to preach the gospel to the Gentiles, he focused on the essentials, the matters of the heart rather than tradition and ceremonial laws. He even confronted Peter, who was considered as one of the "Super Apostle" for being in the wrong. Traditionally, Jews never ate with Gentiles, because in their eyes, they were considered unclean. But Paul refused to take that path anymore. Once, a person is in Christ, Paul saw no difference between Jews and Gentiles. As such, he ate and fellowshipped with non-circumsized Gentiles. However, when Peter visited Paul and Baranabas in Antioch, at first he showed no reluctance to eat with the Gentiles as Paul did. But when James' men from Jerusalem visited Antioch, Peter avoided eating with the Gentiles in their company. His action disappointed and even angered Paul enough to confront Peter. What made worse was the fact Peter's reluctance influenced even Baranabas to avoid eating with the Gentiles.
It's understandable for men at that time to be confused by Paul's argument of taking up grace and not giving into Law, once you're crucified with Christ and made alive again. Expecting it to happen overnight was too much to ask on Paul's side. Though he was right in every respect, customs and traditonal laws cannot be easily cast away like old garments. No doubt Paul was sought after by mobs to be beaten and killed for trying the change their Jewish traditions.
Two millenia had passed and "We are under grace," preach many pastors and Bible teachers, but then why are they still quoting from OT regarding keeping the Sabbath, tithing, eating pork and so on. Church goers are confused whether they're walking on thin ice, not knowing whether to hold onto both and to let go of the old and grabbing on to NT.
It's interesting how Jesus Himself once said,when He was asked why His disciples did not fast as the disciples of John did " No one puts a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; for the patch pulls away from the garment. " The explanation given for the statement which I heard when I was growing up was that , if you try to join OT and NT and walk by the saying, it may not work for once Grace was given, there's no need to follow the old rules. Yet the distinction is not given clearly for everyones understanding because churches seem to do selective choices of the laws from OT and make them a yardstick to measure the faith of believers.
Yes, I understand that without OT, the New Testament wouldn't have made any sense for the Bible student. The Bible as a whole reveal the heart of God and the plan of salvation for the humankind. Without, the New Testament, the Old would have remain incomplete, the great plan not fulfilled. Likewise, without the Old Testament, history of humankind, Jewish nation, prophesies of a Saviour, God's faithfulness would have been missed. In truth, one relies on the other for fulfillment and to be complete. But caution need to be made to take context into consideration when time, culture and circumstance are taken into account. Plucking out scripture out of context to suit our purpose had produced calamity and division among churches and stained the beautiful image of the body of Christ.
No comments:
Post a Comment