Tag: xJewish Law

Natural Law and Biblical Ethics

This post is inspired by a recent, very brief, Sunday School discussion of Joseph’s Godly response to Potiphar’s wife, long before Mt. Sinai and “The Law.” The sense that I took from some of the comments was, “Joseph was a very special man to even know that adultery was sinful, since ‘The Law’ had not yet been given to Moses.”

“Joseph Receives His Father and Brothers”, by Jan de Bray, 1627–1697. Bray specialized in painting historical figures dressed as contemporary figures; hence, the Dutch Renaissance attire.

I wholeheartedly agree that Joseph was special, but not for that reason. I would submit that all human beings have an innate understanding of sin. Potiphar’s wife knew that adultery is sinful but tried to force it on Joseph anyway. The fact that she was able to frame him for the crime of attempted rape shows that she, her husband, and other Egyptians in the story all had moral compunctions about it.

“The Law” as teacher

I suspect that confusion about this issue goes back to the King James translation of Galatians 3:24, which most of us seniors raised in church are probably familiar with:

[23] But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
[24] Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
[25] But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
—Galatians 3:22–25 (KJV) emphasis mine

We were traditionally taught that, as a “schoolmaster“, the job of “The Law” was no more than to teach Israel what God required of faithful servants. Under the “Old Covenant”, those teachings were rigorously applied by God and the Jewish authorities, and in fact, according to old-school Dispensationalism, salvation came to those, both Jew and Gentile, who either “kept ‘The Law'” or who made atonement for their failures by making an appropriate blood sacrifice.

…

[Boy… my intention going into this was to keep it brief, but my brain keeps running down all kinds of rabbit trails. There are many directions I could take that last paragraph, but I’m going to back down and stick to “schoolmaster.” Anyhow, see A Perspective on Biblical Covenants and Dispensations, where I’ve already covered part of it]

…

The term that KJV translates as “schoolmaster“, and NAS as “tutor” is the Greek paidagogos (παιδαγωγός), which literally means “boy-leader”. Historically, in ancient Greece, it referred to a slave whose job it was to conduct children to and from school in safety. In other words, a “guardian” (ESV) or “custodian” (CJB), with no teaching function whatsoever.

If you look up paidagogos (G3807) in Strong’s, you’ll see that it does in fact mention “tutor”, “instructor” and “schoolmaster”, but Strong’s doesn’t determine how a word should be translated—it reflects the way its compilers have seen it translated. In this case it is legitimating an erroneous KJV translation. For that reason, I am reticent to use Strong’s on its own, without reference to other, better, resources. See, for instance, from Vine’s:

“Thus understood, paidagogos is appropriately used with ‘kept in ward’ and ‘shut up,’ whereas to understand it as equivalent to ‘teacher’ introduces an idea entirely foreign to the passage, and throws the Apostle’s argument into confusion.”
—Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words

A better translation of the passage quoted above is therefore,

[23] Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. [24] So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. [25] But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian,
—Galatians 3:23–25 (ESV)

Or the much wordier paraphrase,

[23] Now before the time for this trusting faithfulness came, we were imprisoned in subjection to the system which results from perverting the Torah into legalism, kept under guard until this yet-to-come trusting faithfulness would be revealed. [24] Accordingly, the Torah functioned as a custodian until the Messiah came, so that we might be declared righteous on the ground of trusting and being faithful. [25] But now that the time for this trusting faithfulness has come, we are no longer under a custodian.
—Galatians 3:23–25 (CJB)

Three kinds of “Law”?

You may have noted that I put “The Law” in quotes every time I mentioned it above. That is because the term itself is faulty. The Hebrew term “Torah” means “teaching”, not “law”. The Torah does contain many legal precepts (613 by Jewish counting), but that is only part of the whole. The translators of the Hebrew scriptures into the Greek Septuagint (LXX), lacking a better term, rendered Torah as nomos, which correctly translates to “that which is assigned, or distributed”, as, for example, troop rations or animal feed. That’s not a bad way to look at “teaching” (parceling out knowledge), but since the Jews were becoming increasingly legalistic in their worship, it came to take on the meaning, “law.”

Jesus refused to “abolish the [Mosaic] Law”:

[17] “Don’t think that I have come to abolish the Torah or the Prophets. I have come not to abolish but to complete. [18] Yes indeed! I tell you that until heaven and earth pass away, not so much as a yud* or a stroke will pass from the Torah—not until everything that must happen has happened. [19] So whoever disobeys the least of these mitzvot and teaches others to do so will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But whoever obeys them and so teaches will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.
—Matthew 5:17–19 (CJB)

Christian theologians have attempted to compromise by downgrading parts of Torah while keeping the parts that they can’t bring themselves to discard. I have written about this before:

[There is] a theory I have come across many times since I was a young man—that “Jewish Law” is composed of three categories of commandments: “Moral Law“, “Civil Law“, and “Ceremonial Law“. There are hints of this in Augustine of Hippo, but I think the idea was fleshed out mostly by Thomas Aquinas, so it became a Roman Catholic and Orthodox view. It was later bequeathed to Protestant Reformed theology by John Calvin in his Institutes of the Christian Religion; and many subsequent non-Reformed Protestant denominations and individual pastors have adopted the idea as well. The impetus for these teachings was probably an effort to justify claims that Christians are not bound by Civil and ceremonial Law, while at the same time holding that the Moral Law is somehow “still in effect”.
—Ron Thompson, The Transfiguration and “Jewish Law“

As I mentioned in the above-referenced post, this 3-fold division of Torah is entirely fictitious! I suspect that some would attempt to justify the idea by guessing at the meanings of three technical terms used to categorize the legal precepts in verses such as Deuteronomy 6:1,

Now these are the commandments, the statutes, and the judgments, which the LORD your God commanded to teach you, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go to possess it:
—Deuteronomy 6:1 (KJV)

Correctly understood, those terms mean enacted laws, regulations, and court rulings, as shown below,

“Now this is the mitzvah [commandment; law; ordnance; or precept], the choqim [statutes; enactments; or decrees] and mishpatim [rulings; judgements; sentences; or findings] which ADONAI your God ordered me to teach you for you to obey in the land you are crossing over to possess…“
—Deuteronomy 6:1 (CJB, modified by me)

Why we don’t need “moral law” either now

If you think Joseph was anticipating the Mosaic “Law” when he rebuffed Potiphar’s wife, then what was the source of his ethics? I don’t discount that it could have been prophetic forethought, but then why did the Egyptians have the same qualms over adultery? Put another way, what was the source of pagan ethics, and what is the source of atheistic ethics in our own day? Sure, pagan religion was corrupt because the gods were corrupt (see Gods and Demons), but evidently, even in pagan cultures, sleeping with a temple prostitute was not at all the same as sleeping with a neighbor’s spouse. The former was expected, the latter soundly condemned and likely to get you killed.

The answer is that human beings are endowed by God with an innate, though frequently ignored, sense of right and wrong. Those who study it call it “natural law.” We know implicitly, without having to be told, that adultery, murder, theft and such things as those, are wrong.

So, what is the source of that natural law? It is genetic, certainly, so maybe it was part of our original creation as a species. In my own opinion, it was probably the essence of what happened after Adam and Eve ate from that tree.

“Jacob Blessing the Children of Joseph”, by Rembrandt van Rijn, 1606–1669. More strange clothing.

Biblical Tithing

The purpose of any study of biblical tithing should never be to justify stinginess, because this is clearly not the heart of God! Even if we find that the principle of tithing has no direct applicability to the Church, the study will nevertheless show that God surely desires a spirit of generosity and sacrificial giving.

widowsmitegroup_reg01

That being said, I will show that if you wish to dogmatically insist on tithing Biblically, then you have quite a chore in front of you. During two out of every seven years, you must give 22.5% of gross. During roughly four years of every seven, you only owe 12.5%, but you must take another 10% with you to Jerusalem and consume it there. During the sabbatical and Jubilee years, you don’t owe any tithes or offerings at all, but you also can’t earn any money!

Tithing, as taught by scripture, may be summarized as follows:

  • Technically speaking, tithing applies only to agricultural increase, because virtually all the people of ancient Israel depended on agriculture for their living. In practice, Judaism has always applied the principles to any form of personal increase. Of course, this broadening of application, though done in a spirit of Godly generosity, can be categorized as a “tradition of man.”
  • The central understanding of tithing is that God is the real owner of everything; therefore, tithes and offerings are not ours to give! When a Jew “brings his tithes to the storehouse”, he is to do so humbly, realizing that he is merely conveying to God that which belongs to Him. Of course, there is always some ritual involved, but the ritual comes, not with the giving, but with the separating. In recognition of Gods bounty, blessings are always said at the time that the tithe is separated from the portion that God has graciously allowed the “giver” to keep for his own sustenance.
  • Scripture does not demand just one tithe; rather, there are at least two separate tithes, and a smaller preliminary offering. We will not consider here the complex system of offerings (most of which were scripturally obligatory in Temple days) or taxes for the upkeep of the Temple itself.
  • Before the larger tithes were given, one was to separate out the terumah gedolah, 1/40 of all his increase. This was not a “tithe” (ma’aser, or tenth), but a mandatory “offering” (terumah). Like the tithes, this was required from the “firstfruits”; in other words, “gross”, not “net.” The terumah gedolah was given to the cohanim (priests).
  • After setting aside the terumah gedolah, one must then set aside the ma’aser rishon, or “first tithe.” This amount is a full ten percent of the gross, which in ancient days was given to the l’vi’im (Levites). Ten percent of this amount, the terumas ma’aser, was in turn parceled out to the cohanim.
  • After setting aside the terumah gedolah and the ma’aser rishon, a “second tithe” was required. This tithe was a full ten percent of the firstfruits. Its disposition depended on the year. The produce of the third and sixth year of the shemittah cycle (the seven-year sabbatical cycle) was to be given to the poor. This was known as the ma’aser sheni. The produce of the first, second, fourth and fifth years was separated out and blessed, but was not to be given away—rather, it was to be brought to Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) and consumed there. This was the ma’aser ani.
  • During every seventh year of the shemittah cycle, and during every 49th and 50th year of the Jubilee cycle, no tithes or offerings whatsoever were required. This is of course because no work was allowed during those years.

As gentile Christians, we should realize that every mention of tithing in the Bible refers to practices mandated specifically by what we call the Mosaic Law—that is, the system of legal principles contained within the structure of the Mosaic, or Sinaiatic, Covenant. The covenants of the Tanakh (Old Testament scriptures), including the Mosaic Covenant, were covenants between God and Israel. The Mosaic Law was intended to set Israel apart from other nations and was never meant to be applied to believers of other nations.

The New Testament principle is that God’s people of the gentile nations should give cheerfully as God has prospered them. Though no amount can be legalistically demanded of others, I believe personally that if you don’t set a personal standard for giving that is sacrificial, you are in violation of God’s trust, just as much as if you were a Jew who withheld his tithes and offerings.

So, then, what is the “storehouse” to which tithes were to be brought?

Malachi 3:10 (ESV)
[10] Bring the full tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. And thereby put me to the test, says the LORD of hosts, if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you a blessing until there is no more need

The storehouse is technically the Temple Treasury, more commonly known as the Court of Prayer, and more commonly still as the Court of Women. I don’t like the final term, because it is not true that women were never allowed to go farther into the Temple compound, and in point of fact, non-Levitical men rarely went beyond this court, either. The passage directly separating the Court of Prayer from the Court of Israel and the Court of Priests, where sacrifices were offered, was called the Nicanor Gate. Women were not allowed to pass through this gate, but when it was appropriate for them to move within, there was a separate door, the Gate of Offering Women, in the north wall of the inner Temple court.


Within the Court of Prayer, there were thirteen offering boxes, designated for contributions towards different tithes and offerings. It was into one of these that Jesus observed a widow dropping two small coins, Mk 12:42.