By Brother Michel Lankford
- Paul openly Testified that he was NOT Against Torah (Acts 24:14; Acts 25:8-10; Acts 28:17).**Paul clearly said that he was not teaching against the Laws and Customs of his fathers. If he was teaching against keeping God’s commandments in the Old Testament, when he clearly said that he was not teaching that, he would be lying. He would not be telling the truth, which means he would not even be saved, let alone an apostle, (Revelation 21:8).
- Paul Upholds and Confirms the Authority of ALL Scripture (2 Timothy 3:12-17). Something can either be profitable to train us in all righteousness, or it can be done away with and abolished, but it cannot do both of those jobs at the same time.
- Paul Would Destroy the Very Foundation of the Gospel: (Ephesians 2:20). Paul himself established that the foundation of the gospel was built upon the apostles, and the prophets. Moses was a prophet. If Paul truly went against Moses, then he would be destroying the foundations of the gospel, by his own definition of the term.
- Paul Would Then Be Teaching AGAINST the Biblically Established Definition of TRUTH. (John 17:17; John 14:6; Psalm 19 7-14; Isaiah 8:20; Isaiah 40:8; Psalm 119:142; Psalm 119:144; Psalm 119:151; Psalm 119:160 etc.) The definition of what truth is was already well established long before Paul even got saved, let alone became an apostle and messenger for Messiah. If Paul was truly teaching against honoring the Torah of YHWH, he would be contradicting what the prophets the psalmists, and Messiah already established to be the definition of what truth is.
- Paul Would Then Be PROMOTING the Biblical Definition of SIN: (1 John 3:4; Hosea 8:1; Daniel 9:11; Isaiah 5:20-24 Matthew 7:21, 23; Matthew 13:41-42). YHWH already had a biblically established definition of sin. Messiah confirmed that definition. If Paul was to teach that believers are no longer to uphold the Commandments of God, that would mean that Paul would be promoting what God and what Messiah had already defined to be sin. Again, if Paul was promoting sin and causing others to go into sin, he would not even be saved, let alone an apostle, (Matthew 13:41-42). That is serious.
- Paul Would Then Be Undermining His Own Apostleship, According to Christ. (John 13:16) Paul was an apostle and servant of Jesus Christ (e.g. Titus 1:1). An apostle means to be a messenger. According to Messiah, the messenger who is sent with a message is NOT greater than the ONE who SENT him to deliver the message, (John 13:16). So Messiah is the One who sent Paul. Messiah already declared that those who lived a lifestyle of walking outside the Laws Commandments and Instructions which God gave to Moses will be CONDEMNED, on the future Day of Judgment, (Matthew 7:21-23). That’s what walking in lawlessness means. If Paul was saying that the same thing which Jesus already says will be condemned is now the NEW Grace, then Paul would be putting his own word above what Jesus Christ had previously said. Paul would not be a legitimate apostle of Jesus Christ by definition if he taught the opposite of what Christ said, and claimed that what Christ condemns is now Grace.
- Paul Would Then Be Teaching AGAINST the Biblically Established Definition of LOVING GOD. (e.g. 1 John 5:2-3; John 15:10; John 14:15; John 14:21; cf. Exodus 20:6) Depending on the biblical translation you use, 18 times, God’s word DIRECTLY LINKS LOVING Him, with KEEPING His Commandments 18 times throughout Scripture. By comparison, God NEVER ONCE teaches that we can show our love toward Him, by disobeying His Commandments; (e.g. 1 John 5:2-3; John 15:10; John 14:15; John 14:21; cf. Exodus 20:6; Deuteronomy 5:10; Deuteronomy 7:9; Deuteronomy 11:1; Deuteronomy 11:22; Deuteronomy 19:9; Deuteronomy 30:16; Joshua 22:5; etc. etc. etc. and on and on…). So, IF Paul was teaching AGAINST KEEPING Yahweh’s Commandments as so many suppose, he would literally be teaching us AGAINST LOVING GOD, according to Scripture.
- Paul Would Then Be Preaching a SCHIZOPHRENIC Gospel. (2 Timothy 2:13; 1 John 5:2-3). Scripture repeatedly tells us that we walk in God’s love by KEEPING His Commandments. So, if Paul was truly teaching against keeping the Commandments of God because we are under Grace, that would mean that he would be presenting a schizophrenic gospel. Think about it. Even according to the New Testament, we walk in God’s love by KEEPING His Commandments, but supposedly we are going to walk in the Grace of the SAME God, by BREAKING His Commandments, and by NOT KEEPING them?! Are you Kidding?! Since we clearly walk in God’s Love by KEEPING and HONORING His Commands, you cannot walk in the Grace of the SAME God by, rejecting, by ignoring, and by NOT KEEPING His Commandments. That would be schizophrenic. You can’t walk in love by living one lifestyle, but walk in Grace by living the OPPOSITE lifestyle. By necessity, that would also mean INVALIDATING the entire New Testament.
- Paul Would be PROMOTING what MESSIAH had already previously DEFINED to be VAIN Worship (Matthew 15:1-9; Mark 7:1-13). Messiah had already said that if anyone lays aside the commandments of God in order to keep commandments made by man, that is to be considered VAIN WORSHIP. IF Paul was truly saying, ‘Hey folks, don’t honor what God says, and don’t keep what Messiah has taught you, but do what I say because I have a better revelation, that would mean that Paul would be committing vain worship as Messiah had already previously defined that term. Paul was a man… Anointed, YES; but just a man. Nothing he said could justly overrule or undo what YHWH and Messiah had already said. If anything that Paul said contradicted what YHWH said, then that would be VAIN WORSHIP, according to what Messiah said.
- Paul Would Then Be CONTRADICTING Many of HIS OWN Teachings. This is perhaps the most pregnant point of all. When you do a diligent search of Paul’s teachings and compare Paul’s words with Paul’s words, it becomes clear that Paul was NOT teaching that we should now DISOBEY and do the OPPOSITE of God’s Laws Commandments, and Instructions because of grace in Messiah. The problem is that if Paul was teaching that idea, he would be contradicting other teachings which HE HIMSELF TAUGHT.
- Paul told Gentile-born believers in Rome that the Old Testament was STILL VALID for them (Romans 15:4-6). Paul clearly said that what was written in previous times was written for OUR instruction. Now, something can be valid to instruct us, or it can be completed, done away with, and abolished; you can’t do both of those things at the same time. Since it is still valid for our instruction, then it can’t be abolished and obsolete.
- Paul told Gentile-born believers in Corinth that the Old Testament was STILL VALID for them (1 Cor. 10:1-6, 11-12). Paul specifically wrote to the Gentiles that the things which were written beforehand were written for OUR instruction, so that through perseverance, (meaning the continuing validity of the Scriptures), we might have hope, (Romans 15:4-6). Now he writes to the Gentiles in Corinth that the things that were written beforehand became our examples, so that we would NOT repeat the same mistakes that ancient Israel did, (1 Corinthians 10:1-6, 11-12). So now, after all of that, Paul supposedly is going to REVERSE himself. After teaching us NOT to copy Israel’s mistakes; after telling us NOT to crave evil things, and that the Old Testament was written for our example so that we would NOT DISOBEY God like Israel did; then Paul is supposedly going to suddenly REVERSE himself, and teach us that copying Israel’s mistakes and doing the OPPOSITE of God’s Laws Commandments and Instructions, (just like the ancient Israelites often did do, and were punished for doing so), this is now supposedly a good thing because of Grace?!! Beloved, he just taught the opposite of that concept right here.
- Paul warned Gentile-born Christians in Rome not to be carnal-minded (Romans 8:5-8) Paul could not be teaching that believers should not subject themselves to the Law of God. According to Paul’s own teachings, if Paul was teaching that believers should not subject themselves to the Law of God, then by his own definition, he would be teaching people to be carnal-minded. He would be teaching people to be hostile against God. He would be teaching people not to please God. He would be teaching people to walk in ways that he said would lead them to DEATH, and NOT Eternal Life. According to Paul’s own stated standards, he could NOT have been teaching believers AGAINST subjecting themselves to and obeying the Law of God. We must have misunderstood Paul somewhere.
- Paul Exhorted Corinthian Christians that they Were Required to SEPARATE from ANOMIA in Order to Be Accepted by YHWH as His Children (2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1). If Paul was truly teaching people to do the opposite of Yahweh’s Laws Commandments and Instructions because of grace, then he would clearly be contradicting his own teachings throughout the New Testament. He could NOT possibly be teaching us to SEPARATE from lawlessness and then be PROMOTING lawlessness, (ANOMIA), at the same time.
- Paul would be promoting what HE defined to be the Antichrist, (2 Thessalonians 2:3, 7, 8-12). Paul uses the term ANOMIA to describe the ANTICHRIST if Paul was truly promoting that people should walk outside of God’s Laws Commandments and Instructions because of Grace, that would also mean that Paul would be promoting the characteristics of the ANTICHRIST, even as Paul defined that term. So, that is a huge problem. The same things that Paul describes as Antichrist, CANNOT be the definition of Grace at the same time.
- If Paul was truly teaching that believers should not honor the Law of YHWH anymore, then Paul would be contradicting his own definition of what Grace means, (Titus 2:11-15). According to Paul, YHWH Almighty Gave us Grace through Messiah to redeem us FROM Every Lawless Deed, Not to Encourage More Lawlessness. Since even Paul said that YHWH sent Grace through Messiah to REDEEM us FROM lawlessness, (ANOMIA), that also means that continuing to walk outside of God’s Laws Commandments and Instructions, CANNOT be what it means to walk in God’s Grace at the same time. Since Grace came to redeem us from lawlessness, then continuing to be lawless CANNOT be a work of Grace.
- Paul Said We’re Not “Under The Law,” but he was talking about us not being subject to the law of sin and death, (Romans 6:1-14; Romans 8:5-8). He wasn’t talking about us not subjecting ourselves to God’s law, because that would be carnal-minded. If you look at the passage carefully, Paul is clearly talking about us not being subject to the law of our sinful nature, and that we should not obey our sinful nature anymore. He is not talking about us not being subject to God’s law, as most Christians incorrectly assume.
- Paul Gives the before and after Picture of Salvation (Romans 6:19). Before we were saved by Grace through faith in Messiah we were lawless. We routinely walked outside of God’s Laws Commandments and Instructions, because that’s what sinners do; just like dogs, bark because they are dogs. The point is that AFTER we are born again by grace through faith in Messiah, we should NO LONGER CONTINUE to be LAWLESS. We should no longer continue to walk outside of God’s Laws Commandments and Instructions. Even Paul said as much.
- Paul CLEARLY warns us about the wrath of YHWH Coming on the Sons of Disobedience (Ephesians 2:1-3; Ephesians 5:1-7 Colossians 3:1-7). Beloved, if obeying Yahweh no longer matters because we are, “Under Grace,” then WHY does Paul the, “Apostle of Grace,” repeatedly WARN Christians in the New Testament to REPENT and to walk correctly so that we can avoid the WRATH of YHWH, which is coming upon the “Sons of DISOBEDIENCE? If obeying Yahweh does not matter under grace, then WHY did Paul even bother to give such warnings to the Christian saints, in the “New Testament”?
- The Bereans believed Paul AFTER searching the Old Testament daily, (Acts 17:10-12). This could not be more blatant and obvious. IF Paul was TRULY teaching that believers should DISOBEY YHWH’s Eternal Commandments in the Written Old Testament, as many Christians so eagerly assume today, the Bereans simply COULD NOT and WOULD NOT have believed Paul’s message after searching the Old Testament daily. The simple reality that the Bereans came to BELIEVE and to accept Paul’s message after searching the Old Testament daily, simply means that Paul WAS NOT and COULD NOT be teaching AGAINST the Written Old Testament, as so many Christians WISH to believe that Paul was teaching. If Paul was teaching against honoring the Old Testament as most Christians assume, then how did the Bereans come to believe Paul’s message after searching the Old Testament daily?
- Paul was teaching against honoring man-made religious customs, and NOT against Written Scripture. While there are SOME places in Scripture where it does APPEAR that Paul is teaching that believers in Messiah should no longer attempt to honor the Torah, (e.g. Colossians 2; Ephesians 2; Galatians 3). The problem is that in EVERY instance the CONTEXT of the passages clearly shows that Paul is correcting false teachings of the rabbinical Jewish system, of the pagan cultures surrounding the congregations, or of Gnosticism which is contrary to the gospel. Paul was NEVER teaching AGAINST OBEYING the Written Scriptures.
We just gave 21very strong biblical examples where Paul was not preaching or teaching against the Law of YHWH in written Scripture.
Paul was FALSELY accused of preaching against Moses, (Acts 21:21). Much like Stephen was falsely accused, (Acts 7), and Messiah himself was FALSELY accused of violating the Law.
FACT: The original language word, “DECREES” in Colossians 2:14 is “DOGMASIN”
So verse 14 actually reads:
“Having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees (DOGMASIN) against us, which were hostile to us, and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.” (Colossians 2:14)
So clearly, it was the DOGMASIN, And NOT YHWH’s Commandments, which Messiah nailed to the cross and took out of the way.
IMPORTANT: It is CRITICAL to understand that the word DOGMASIN is NEVER used to refer to a God-given or Christ given commandment, [even “Christian” SOURCES acknowledge this to be true]. The word DOGMASIN is always and only used to refer to a man-made regulation or ruling by HUMAN civil and religious authorities. [Examples: Luke 2:1; Acts 16:4; Acts 17:7].
Swanson, J. (1997). Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament) (electronic ed.). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
Strong, J. (2001). Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.
For example, Oswald Chambers (author of My Utmost for His Highest) in his book If Thou Wilt be Perfect, chambers writes that. “The holiest character is the Lord Jesus Christ, therefore His statements are never dogmas, they are declarations.”
NOTICE: Paul CLEARLY and openly refers to God’s Law in Romans 8:5-8, but by contrast, he refers to dogmasin, [human religious law] in Colossians 2:14; Ephesians 2:15, so he’s not being nearly as ambiguous as people WISH that Paul was being.
IMPORTANT: I find it at once both interesting and sinister, that while Christian sources will openly admit on the one hand that dogmatic can NEVER refer to a God-given command or a Christ given Commandment; on the other hand we are TOLD, [by religious authorities, ironically] that the dogmasin in Colossians 2:13-14; and Ephesians 2:15 supposedly must refer to the Commandments of Elohim. I wonder if they are allowing the definitions of terms to CHANGE to support Christian rabbinical CONVENIENCE, rather than biblical truths?